|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Laker_Dynasty
Franchise Player
Joined: 21 May 2001
Posts: 11831
Location: West LA
|
 Posted: Fri Apr 10, 2009 9:39 am Post subject: Re: Referee issues from last night. |
|
|
| tlim wrote: | So what's the deal with the game last night? I know the Lakers got to the line a lot, but it seemed like they should have gotten there a lot more.
Denver was able to camp in the lane for basically as long as they wanted while on defense. Andersen would just wait behind Kobe's defender, planted in the key while Kobe's back is to the basket. He's just waiting there, waiting for his move. Kobe getting the five count was much more likely that the Birdman getting called for illegal defense.
Also, that play where Kobe just whips his arms around while Chauncey had his hands on him seemed really weird. Wasn't that type of shot a foul before? That's Duncan's old move. Did they decide not call those anylonger? I notice Kobe rarely, if at all, gets those these days. |
Well, the calls were weird on both sides, so neither side can really complain (ticky-tack calls on the perimeter, but let them have much more contact in the paint - unless plainly obvious). Denver took A LOT of jumpshots, which is why there was a bigger disparity at the FT line.
If what you are saying was true, and Birdman was camping out behind Kobe's defender, then that would mean he was an arm distance away from Kobe. That's not illegal defense anymore. The times that are considered "illegal defense" (termed "defensive 3 seconds" now), are when a defender is more than an arms distance away from ANY offensive player while in the key. So, in essence, if Denver was overloading their help defender to the point that the help defender was within arms distance of Kobe, they're still safe. The moment that help defender drifts away from Kobe at more than an arms distance length (in order to not leave someone wide open), but stays in the key for 3 seconds, that becomes a violation.
Kobe tried to do the swing through move on Chauncey, but Chauncey moved his arms up while Kobe was trying to swing through, which is why they didn't make the call. Had Kobe swung through faster, where Chauncey couldn't react as quickly, it would've been a foul. I think that type of call would've been made with a different officiating crew. All the officiating crews have certain calls that they make and some that they don't. That particular play could've been seen either way (e.g. grey area), but it definitely wasn't a "definitive" foul that the officials "missed." Just one of those plays where an argument could be made either way.
_________________
Just chill  and watch the new Dynasty evolve...
Time for the Lakers to create a whole new legacy! We want 10 more trophies boys! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
CorkyTomjanovich
Star Player
Joined: 13 Dec 2004
Posts: 3486
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 10, 2009 9:45 am Post subject: Re: Referee issues from last night. |
|
|
| Laker_Dynasty wrote: | | tlim wrote: | So what's the deal with the game last night? I know the Lakers got to the line a lot, but it seemed like they should have gotten there a lot more.
Denver was able to camp in the lane for basically as long as they wanted while on defense. Andersen would just wait behind Kobe's defender, planted in the key while Kobe's back is to the basket. He's just waiting there, waiting for his move. Kobe getting the five count was much more likely that the Birdman getting called for illegal defense.
Also, that play where Kobe just whips his arms around while Chauncey had his hands on him seemed really weird. Wasn't that type of shot a foul before? That's Duncan's old move. Did they decide not call those anylonger? I notice Kobe rarely, if at all, gets those these days. |
Well, the calls were weird on both sides, so neither side can really complain (ticky-tack calls on the perimeter, but let them have much more contact in the paint - unless plainly obvious). Denver took A LOT of jumpshots, which is why there was a bigger disparity at the FT line.
If what you are saying was true, and Birdman was camping out behind Kobe's defender, then that would mean he was an arm distance away from Kobe. That's not illegal defense anymore. The times that are considered "illegal defense" (termed "defensive 3 seconds" now), are when a defender is more than an arms distance away from ANY offensive player while in the key. So, in essence, if Denver was overloading their help defender to the point that the help defender was within arms distance of Kobe, they're still safe. The moment that help defender drifts away from Kobe at more than an arms distance length (in order to not leave someone wide open), but stays in the key for 3 seconds, that becomes a violation.
Kobe tried to do the swing through move on Chauncey, but Chauncey moved his arms up while Kobe was trying to swing through, which is why they didn't make the call. Had Kobe swung through faster, where Chauncey couldn't react as quickly, it would've been a foul. I think that type of call would've been made with a different officiating crew. All the officiating crews have certain calls that they make and some that they don't. That particular play could've been seen either way (e.g. grey area), but it definitely wasn't a "definitive" foul that the officials "missed." Just one of those plays where an argument could be made either way. |
That is simply not true. Billups had his arm down and it was a foul, they just didn't call it.
To the thread starter- The officiating could have been a whole lot worse considering how physical the Nuggets play. Just be grateful the team got to the line at a good rate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TooMuchMajicBuss
Franchise Player
Joined: 17 Sep 2008
Posts: 21080
Location: In a white room, with black curtains near the station
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 10, 2009 10:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| grimmz4764 wrote: | | TooMuchMajicBuss wrote: | ^^I didn't expect 21 minutes the first game back either. I REALLY didn't expect to see him with 16 points, and I thought the Lakers would be more out of synch until they adjust to having him back.
Bynum passes test number 1 with flying colors. Now, on to test number 2!! Knock Pryzbilla down a few notches. Do it Drew!!! |
What did Pryz say? I think he's a candidate for a guy who was called underrated for so long that he's now officially overrated. |
iirc it was along the line of an emphatic "We kicked their asses, and you can print that." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakersDa1
Starting Rotation
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Posts: 158
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 10, 2009 10:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Did any of you guys notice the defense that kobe put on Melo, when they were trying to give him the ball??? That sh*t was picture pefect prevent defense, even Melo was chuckling bout it, i bet you he was like dammmn kobe kick it, Fool dont you know Kobe dont take plays off>??? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TooMuchMajicBuss
Franchise Player
Joined: 17 Sep 2008
Posts: 21080
Location: In a white room, with black curtains near the station
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 10, 2009 10:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| grimmz4764 wrote: | | TooMuchMajicBuss wrote: | ^^I didn't expect 21 minutes the first game back either. I REALLY didn't expect to see him with 16 points, and I thought the Lakers would be more out of synch until they adjust to having him back.
Bynum passes test number 1 with flying colors. Now, on to test number 2!! Knock Pryzbilla down a few notches. Do it Drew!!! |
What did Pryz say? I think he's a candidate for a guy who was called underrated for so long that he's now officially overrated. |
"It was the Lakers. And we beat the (bleep) out of them. And you can print that. In bold. And big letters."
(thanks to Kuroro on the Portland game thread for digging this up)
I hope Pryz get's a big tub of smackdown poured all over him tonight. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tlim
Star Player
Joined: 26 Jun 2002
Posts: 6649
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 10, 2009 12:05 pm Post subject: Re: Referee issues from last night. |
|
|
| CorkyTomjanovich wrote: | | Laker_Dynasty wrote: |
If what you are saying was true, and Birdman was camping out behind Kobe's defender, then that would mean he was an arm distance away from Kobe. That's not illegal defense anymore. The times that are considered "illegal defense" (termed "defensive 3 seconds" now), are when a defender is more than an arms distance away from ANY offensive player while in the key. So, in essence, if Denver was overloading their help defender to the point that the help defender was within arms distance of Kobe, they're still safe. The moment that help defender drifts away from Kobe at more than an arms distance length (in order to not leave someone wide open), but stays in the key for 3 seconds, that becomes a violation.
|
|
Actually, he was behind the guy, but definitely _not_ within 3 feet. Remember, 3 feet is approximately arms, length, and the guy camped out waiting for a move. In other words, he was closer to 6 feet back. There was a defender in between birdman and kobe. So you're saying that is within 3 feet? They must have been really friend if that was the case. Crouching down in a defensive stance alone takes up almost 3 feet. A guy standing behind him is well beyond 3 feet.
| CorkyTomjanovich wrote: | | Laker_Dynasty wrote: |
Kobe tried to do the swing through move on Chauncey, but Chauncey moved his arms up while Kobe was trying to swing through, which is why they didn't make the call. Had Kobe swung through faster, where Chauncey couldn't react as quickly, it would've been a foul. I think that type of call would've been made with a different officiating crew. All the officiating crews have certain calls that they make and some that they don't. That particular play could've been seen either way (e.g. grey area), but it definitely wasn't a "definitive" foul that the officials "missed." Just one of those plays where an argument could be made either way. |
That is simply not true. Billups had his arm down and it was a foul, they just didn't call it.
To the thread starter- The officiating could have been a whole lot worse considering how physical the Nuggets play. Just be grateful the team got to the line at a good rate. |
My issue isn't that we got there at a good rate. My issue is that the ref is right there in front of him, and that move almost always warrants a free throw. Why wasn't it this time, even though, to me, it sure looked like he got a bunch of arm even though Chauncey lifted up his arms. I think they *might* have called it if it did not go in though. Still, it's just too blatant, IMO. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
