NBA has the "one and one" free throw rule. You just don't seem many because of the "continuation rule". Fouls that would draw a 1 and 1 in college get called a shooting foul in the NBA and bring 2 FT's.
i dont watch hockey but the hockey playoffs top everything. thats some intense ****. i may make a point to watch some this year.
1 and 1 in college are non-shooting fouls on the 7th-9th fouls of the half. In the NBA, you get 2 FT's for either shooting fouls or on the 5th foul of the quarter. There are no 1 and 1's in the NBA.
I like the 4 point line idea. If I could change anything about the NBA it would be the officiating. I hate the idea that players get technical fouls for even arguing with the officials. The NBA official has waaaaaaay too much power to influence games. I also hate David Stern. I don't like the fact that NBA players are not allowed to talk about the CBA, I don't like they aren't allowed to criticize the officials, i think that is a universally stupid rule for all sports.
Shows how much I watch the NBA, I guess. Once upon a time, the NBA had a "3 to make 2" rule. You missed either of the first two FT's, and you got a third. Don't remember what the circumstances were to draw that combo, and I think they eliminated it in the late 70's. I know it existed when the Jazz were in New Orleans.
Agree with this. The interpretation of what is a shot is ridiculous too. Jarrett Jack got 3 FTs yesterday on a foul in which the ball never got higher than his chest. But the whistle blew, so he made a gesture toward the basket...bingo, act of shooting. The rules that extend the game in the final 2:00 are even more absurd. You get rewarded for calling a timeout after a made basket by having the ball moved beyond half court? WTF is that?
In the past year or two, the NBA placed an emphasis on giving players technical fouls for arguing with refs. Fans were complaining about how much NBA players "whine" after having fouls called on them, especially in the playoffs. It's such a subjective thing to officiate, much like the overall game of basketball. I've never attempted to referee basketball at any adult level and would never want to try it. I agree officials have way too much power to influence games but not sure how to make it better. All a ref has to do is call two early fouls on a team's superstar to heavily influence the outcome.
I think it was Jeff Van Gundy that also complained about the rule interpretation on this play (or a similar play). There seems to be an increase in perimeter players drawing fouls from the defender by getting tangled up before actually getting the shot off. In the recent past, if you pump faked and got a defender off his feet, all you had to do was jump into him to have the foul called. Now, NBA refs won't call the foul if the offensive player is the one initiating contact (either no-call or charge). There may need to be more discussion about whether the offensive or defensive player is initiating the contact on those plays when they get tangled up on those pre-shot situations.
You should be rooting for Memphis to upset San Antonio. The Thunder could easily surprise everyone by coming out of the West. Their trade for Perkins really helped the balance of the team.
100% disagree. Memphis is a ball of hate and those effers can straight up ball. The spurs are old and hurting and best case scenario is for memphis to take them deep into the series with SA finding a way to eek it out. A tired and aging S/A team is a much better match up for OKC than memphis. We will have our hands full with a much better denver sans mello team before even having to worry about it though.
