|
Post by bbg95 on Jun 27, 2021 0:25:10 GMT -5
Identical scenario happens late in the Clippers-Suns game, but this time, they choose not to look at it. I think it would have been overruled again. Both teams have completely blown opportunities this game. There's speculation on Reddit that the officials in this game (a different crew that didn't include the terrible Scott Foster) intentionally chose not to review it. There's also speculation that there is enough heat on this issue that the NBA will make a rules adjustment in the offseason. I certainly hope so. The NBA clearly has a consistency issue on plays like this both from game to game and also from the first 46 minutes to the last two. They just need to clarify it. Edit: According to the league, if the official has no doubt on the play, they don't review it. That's up the official's discretion. Convenient, but right in my view.
|
|
|
Post by azvb on Jun 28, 2021 17:39:01 GMT -5
This rule seems similar to a wipe off of a blocker. When you watch the ball swiped out of bounds in basketball (in slow motion), it’s clearly “off” the player who had the ball. Isn’t it? Or am I dilusional?
GO SUNS 🔥!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Jun 28, 2021 18:40:34 GMT -5
This rule seems similar to a wipe off of a blocker. When you watch the ball swiped out of bounds in basketball (in slow motion), it’s clearly “off” the player who had the ball. Isn’t it? Or am I dilusional? GO SUNS 🔥!!!!!! I'm not exactly sure about the volleyball analogy, but the ball has almost always been off the defender for the entire history of basketball until recently. And now, it's only off the offensive player in the last two minutes because of instant replay and a rather unintuitive literal interpretation of the rule. There's a consistency issue right now, so I think the NBA needs to clarify the rule so that it's either one or the other consistently throughout the game.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jun 28, 2021 20:33:27 GMT -5
This rule seems similar to a wipe off of a blocker. When you watch the ball swiped out of bounds in basketball (in slow motion), it’s clearly “off” the player who had the ball. Isn’t it? Or am I dilusional? GO SUNS 🔥!!!!!! I'm not exactly sure about the volleyball analogy, but the ball has almost always been off the defender for the entire history of basketball until recently. And now, it's only off the offensive player in the last two minutes because of instant replay and a rather unintuitive literal interpretation of the rule. There's a consistency issue right now, so I think the NBA needs to clarify the rule so that it's either one or the other consistently throughout the game. Yeah, it's always been the general rule that if a defender swipes at the ball and it goes out of bounds, it belongs to the offense. Conversely, if the offensive player dribbles it off his foot or something, it goes to the defense. The exceptions are mainly about times when the ball is loose but in bounds, both teams scramble after it, and then a player knocks it out of bounds.
|
|
|
Post by azvb on Jun 28, 2021 20:35:15 GMT -5
This rule seems similar to a wipe off of a blocker. When you watch the ball swiped out of bounds in basketball (in slow motion), it’s clearly “off” the player who had the ball. Isn’t it? Or am I dilusional? GO SUNS 🔥!!!!!! I'm not exactly sure about the volleyball analogy, but the ball has almost always been off the defender for the entire history of basketball until recently. And now, it's only off the offensive player in the last two minutes because of instant replay and a rather unintuitive literal interpretation of the rule. There's a consistency issue right now, so I think the NBA needs to clarify the rule so that it's either one or the other consistently throughout the game. Oh, I agree, the rule is stupid. But, in basketball, when you slow it down, very often the defensive player swipes the ball off the offensive (dribbler) players hands.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jun 28, 2021 20:56:09 GMT -5
I'm not exactly sure about the volleyball analogy, but the ball has almost always been off the defender for the entire history of basketball until recently. And now, it's only off the offensive player in the last two minutes because of instant replay and a rather unintuitive literal interpretation of the rule. There's a consistency issue right now, so I think the NBA needs to clarify the rule so that it's either one or the other consistently throughout the game. Oh, I agree, the rule is stupid. But, in basketball, when you slow it down, very often the defensive player swipes the ball off the offensive (dribbler) players hands. It's never been called that way, though. Until now, I guess. (Now I feel like Ruffda complaining about micro-touches.) Video has somewhat changed some of these old rules, though. In baseball it used to be "ball beats runner, runner is out". Now, however, they can challenge, and sometimes it shows that the tag was not actually made. Baseball also had to deal with another rule that was in practice for a very long time -- the "neighborhood play". If, in the ump's opinion, a player making the double-play turn at second base was close enough to the bag ("in the neighborhood"), the out was usually called even if the player didn't actually touch the bag. This was to avoid injuries from collisions between runners and fielders. At first this was specifically not allowed to be reviewed with replay, as it was considered a judgement call even though by rule it's not. But later they changed the rules to try to prevent dangerous slides, and also allowed the neighborhood play to be challenged.
|
|
|
Post by azvb on Jun 28, 2021 21:32:52 GMT -5
Oh, I agree, the rule is stupid. But, in basketball, when you slow it down, very often the defensive player swipes the ball off the offensive (dribbler) players hands. It's never been called that way, though. Until now, I guess. (Now I feel like Ruffda complaining about micro-touches.) Video has somewhat changed some of these old rules, though. In baseball it used to be "ball beats runner, runner is out". Now, however, they can challenge, and sometimes it shows that the tag was not actually made. Baseball also had to deal with another rule that was in practice for a very long time -- the "neighborhood play". If, in the ump's opinion, a player making the double-play turn at second base was close enough to the bag ("in the neighborhood"), the out was usually called even if the player didn't actually touch the bag. This was to avoid injuries from collisions between runners and fielders. At first this was specifically not allowed to be reviewed with replay, as it was considered a judgement call even though by rule it's not. But later they changed the rules to try to prevent dangerous slides, and also allowed the neighborhood play to be challenged. So, is it actually a rule change, or is it now a point of emphasis? And I agree, call it like it’s always been called!
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Jun 28, 2021 23:11:24 GMT -5
It's never been called that way, though. Until now, I guess. (Now I feel like Ruffda complaining about micro-touches.) Video has somewhat changed some of these old rules, though. In baseball it used to be "ball beats runner, runner is out". Now, however, they can challenge, and sometimes it shows that the tag was not actually made. Baseball also had to deal with another rule that was in practice for a very long time -- the "neighborhood play". If, in the ump's opinion, a player making the double-play turn at second base was close enough to the bag ("in the neighborhood"), the out was usually called even if the player didn't actually touch the bag. This was to avoid injuries from collisions between runners and fielders. At first this was specifically not allowed to be reviewed with replay, as it was considered a judgement call even though by rule it's not. But later they changed the rules to try to prevent dangerous slides, and also allowed the neighborhood play to be challenged. So, is it actually a rule change, or is it now a point of emphasis? And I agree, call it like it’s always been called! No rule change. It was just something that was never able to be seen until they started using slow-mo replays in the past couple years.
|
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 28,112
|
Post by trojansc on Jun 29, 2021 0:07:19 GMT -5
It's never been called that way, though. Until now, I guess. (Now I feel like Ruffda complaining about micro-touches.) Video has somewhat changed some of these old rules, though. In baseball it used to be "ball beats runner, runner is out". Now, however, they can challenge, and sometimes it shows that the tag was not actually made. Baseball also had to deal with another rule that was in practice for a very long time -- the "neighborhood play". If, in the ump's opinion, a player making the double-play turn at second base was close enough to the bag ("in the neighborhood"), the out was usually called even if the player didn't actually touch the bag. This was to avoid injuries from collisions between runners and fielders. At first this was specifically not allowed to be reviewed with replay, as it was considered a judgement call even though by rule it's not. But later they changed the rules to try to prevent dangerous slides, and also allowed the neighborhood play to be challenged. So, is it actually a rule change, or is it now a point of emphasis? And I agree, call it like it’s always been called! I like consistency, but I also like concrete rules. The challenge rule is lame in the NBA. Allow for more challenges and the correct call (according to the rules, would be made) If they change this rule, fine, it is what it is. It's just very weird to me that they could allow a player to be the last to touch a ball and they keep possession. I understand it may be near impossible to see. I don't think every swat off the hands will always mean the offensive player touched it last though. It gets tricky though because does it matter *how* much it went off? Like mikegarrison pointed out before, he doesn't mind the offense losing possession as long as it touches off another part of their body. Would that include a different finger, or even a part of the palm, or arm? I wonder what the NBA will do. I would like consistency, but as I have said, my opinion about the rule (keeping it as it is) may result in more delays and harder calls to make. With the challenge system as it is, that's not a good look. But if the FIVB can get results in quick, I'm sure the NBA can find a way to get these replays in quick if they did keep the rule.
|
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 28,112
|
Post by trojansc on Jun 29, 2021 0:22:01 GMT -5
More importantly.....
The #ComebackClippers ain't done yet!
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Jun 29, 2021 0:50:23 GMT -5
So, is it actually a rule change, or is it now a point of emphasis? And I agree, call it like it’s always been called! I like consistency, but I also like concrete rules. The challenge rule is lame in the NBA. Allow for more challenges and the correct call (according to the rules, would be made) If they change this rule, fine, it is what it is. It's just very weird to me that they could allow a player to be the last to touch a ball and they keep possession. I understand it may be near impossible to see. I don't think every swat off the hands will always mean the offensive player touched it last though. It gets tricky though because does it matter *how* much it went off? Like mikegarrison pointed out before, he doesn't mind the offense losing possession as long as it touches off another part of their body. Would that include a different finger, or even a part of the palm, or arm? I wonder what the NBA will do. I would like consistency, but as I have said, my opinion about the rule (keeping it as it is) may result in more delays and harder calls to make. With the challenge system as it is, that's not a good look. But if the FIVB can get results in quick, I'm sure the NBA can find a way to get these replays in quick if they did keep the rule. I guess we'll see, but judging from what I've seen online, I think most people are vastly in favor of the traditional interpretation of the rule (i.e. out on the defense in most cases). And I think you have a lot more faith in the NBA's ability to adjudicate replays quickly than I do. As you said, it's not a good look when the last two minutes of a game take over half an hour in real time because of these reviews. Clarifying the rule so reviews are not so unintuitive would be helpful because it would eliminate the need for many of these reviews altogether and/or should lead to them being decided more quickly.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jun 29, 2021 1:59:37 GMT -5
Like mikegarrison pointed out before, he doesn't mind the offense losing possession as long as it touches off another part of their body I think you misunderstood. I don't mind the offense losing the ball if they dribble it off of themselves, fumble it around, lose control of the dribble, etc. But if the defense slaps the ball out of their hands (and it goes out), it should remain with the offense. IMO.
|
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 28,112
|
Post by trojansc on Jun 29, 2021 2:02:40 GMT -5
Like mikegarrison pointed out before, he doesn't mind the offense losing possession as long as it touches off another part of their body I think you misunderstood. I don't mind the offense losing the ball if they dribble it off of themselves, fumble it around, lose control of the dribble, etc. But if the defense slaps the ball out of their hands (and it goes out), it should remain with the offense. IMO. I don't think I misunderstood, but maybe I'm wrong. I thought your post was saying that if the defense slaps the ball out of the offenses hand's, and subsequently, the ball goes off another part of the offensive player's body (i.e foot, elbow, whatever) you think it should be the defense's ball. The only way the offense will retain possession in your proposition is if it is knocked out of their possession and is a bang-bang play, like, it just simply goes off their hands but their hand was touching the ball just slightly longer.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jun 29, 2021 2:58:08 GMT -5
I think you misunderstood. I don't mind the offense losing the ball if they dribble it off of themselves, fumble it around, lose control of the dribble, etc. But if the defense slaps the ball out of their hands (and it goes out), it should remain with the offense. IMO. I don't think I misunderstood, but maybe I'm wrong. I thought your post was saying that if the defense slaps the ball out of the offenses hand's, and subsequently, the ball goes off another part of the offensive player's body (i.e foot, elbow, whatever) you think it should be the defense's ball. I'm telling you that you misunderstood. That is not what I said or what I meant, either.
|
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 28,112
|
Post by trojansc on Jun 29, 2021 4:05:55 GMT -5
I don't think I misunderstood, but maybe I'm wrong. I thought your post was saying that if the defense slaps the ball out of the offenses hand's, and subsequently, the ball goes off another part of the offensive player's body (i.e foot, elbow, whatever) you think it should be the defense's ball. I'm telling you that you misunderstood. That is not what I said or what I meant, either. Well, it wasn't exactly that I misunderstood, but I was referring to the wrong person/post. It wasn't you who made the argument I was thinking of in referencing that post. In making my post, I thought it was you who said this: I think it should always be off the defensive player unless they were able to knock it off a different part of the offensive player's body (foot, shin, etc.). You disagree with that, correct? The 3 of us here who have expressed an opinion on the rule, want or believe in, at least, to have 3 different interpretations or a change of a rule it seems. Will be very interesting to see how the NBA deals with it.
|
|