Amare calls Bowen, Ginobili, Spurs "dirty"

[magius]

points well taken. like i said, in the end, i personally wouldn't consider bowen dirty, because i don't think the tactics questioned are applied with criminal intent. if you still don't agree, then lets agree to disagree. that said i wouldn't mind if he were suspended if another occurence were to occur. perhaps he should have been suspended earlier? who knows, but i don't blame the nba for not doing so. after all it seems the accusations have only now been gaining a momentum of almost ridiculous nature. you know, like a rolling stone and all. and, again, imho none of the incidents were without doubt. in a way i admire that they were not swayed by public pressure.

oh and btw, directed to no one in particular, calling the spurs a dirty team is pretty laughable; its almost like a double edged sword with a bladed hilt in doing so. but it seems that sometimes it is the nature of the beast.

[Jackal]

Not to break up a good discussion, but Magius, I love you.

[magius]

Not to break up a good discussion, but Magius, I love you.

you're dirty.

[Jackal]

Maybe they should just suspend me if I'm that dirty.

Do you have any solid evidence to back that claim up?

[Andrew]

oh and btw, directed to no one in particular, calling the spurs a dirty team is pretty laughable; its almost like a double edged sword with a bladed hilt in doing so. but it seems that sometimes it is the nature of the beast.

The Spurs, a dirty team on the whole? No, I don't think so. As you said we'll probably have to agree to disagree on the Bowen incidents but I wouldn't say the Spurs are a dirty team. I still believe Manu is a world class flopper though he's certainly not alone in the NBA in that regard. Mind you, given that good scorers are generally able to initiate the slightest contact with a defender who's jumping straight up/has his hands straight up and get a soft three point play out of it, it's no wonder so many players are seeking Oscars for their defense.

[Sauru]

"what ruins the quality of basketball is when people bitch and make excuses about insignificant little things that aren't even, without doubt, there, rather than focus on the quality of basketball."


what is ruining the game of basketball is the stupid things the league has allowed to take over the game, and at the top of that list is the flop. this is imo one of the biggest problems with the league right now. several times within this thread i have read people talk about sucking it up or being a man yet in todays nba its better to play like a pussy and drop to the ground. i understand that drawing a foul is a skill, but flat out acting to get to the line needs to be stopped by the league. they also need to put a stop to the offensive player jumping into the defensive player and getting the foul that way. i cant even count how many times i see a defender jump straight up on a pump fake then see the offensive player jump forward after getting the defender into the air to draw a foul. 2 huge problems the league needs to fix imo.

[galvatron3000]

points well taken. like i said, in the end, i personally wouldn't consider bowen dirty, because i don't think the tactics questioned are applied with criminal intent. if you still don't agree, then lets agree to disagree. that said i wouldn't mind if he were suspended if another occurence were to occur. perhaps he should have been suspended earlier? who knows, but i don't blame the nba for not doing so. after all it seems the accusations have only now been gaining a momentum of almost ridiculous nature. you know, like a rolling stone and all. and, again, imho none of the incidents were without doubt. in a way i admire that they were not swayed by public pressure.

oh and btw, directed to no one in particular, calling the spurs a dirty team is pretty laughable; its almost like a double edged sword with a bladed hilt in doing so. but it seems that sometimes it is the nature of the beast.

Very Well Said


I also want to make a comment on Bowen in regards to what happened with Ray Allen. Many people have watched that replay and I have yet to hear one person say or mention what Ray did. Yes, it was totally wrong for Bowen to kick Ray but I watched that tape and I knew exactly why Bowen did it, right or wrong the reaction was not without a reason. I don't agree with the reaction but I certainly understand it. The reason I bring this up is because the media is running a circus act on fans. They are dictating our discussions and yet we aren't actually attentive to detal. Ray has been whining about Bowen forever, yet when ever you see the two play I notice things that Ray is doing offensively that is just as "bad" as what Bowen is doing defensively. When the kick incident happened you heard Bowen admit he was wrong, took his punishment, never mentioned once why he did, nor made mention to what Ray did to cause his frustration, yet when things go wrong for Ray he totally blames Bowen and whines about it. No one defended Bowen's actions but not one person point to the frustration Bowen was justified in having either. So, this media frenzy is using Bowen as a catalyst, blowing the Spurs image into BAD GUYS, and people are going nuts over it. Again, the MEdia has made Phoenix into America's Team and the Spurs into DETROIT '89 reincarnate, which is a joke. The SPurs are good guys, great team and great organiztion. Don't allow this media trickery sway your objective reasoning. Most of the folks complaining hated the Spurs long before any of this "DIRTY" stuff was born and are just using this to make their points on thier hate for S.A.

[jonthefon]

You're right about that, I despise the Spurs

[magius]

Maybe they should just suspend me if I'm that dirty.

Do you have any solid evidence to back that claim up?

yesterday i saw you picking your nose and someone in thailand died.

sauru, who doesn't flop? I love nash, he's a canadian, has all the qualities of a great true pg with heart. but don't tell me he doesn't flop like a fish with diarhea on its way to the frying pan. yao ming drops like a newborn babe as soon as he hears a whistle, and this isn't something new. remember miller? divac? the jazz? you can go as far back as tape exists.

if you're saying they flop more and more easily now.... well, one can argue that way way back they didnt dare flop as much or as easily, because the rules weren't as soft. they knew they wouldn't get the call if they did. soft rules, soft flops.

[Matt]

i think Bell took the flop king crown from Gino in this series.

[galvatron3000]

i think Bell took the flop king crown from Gino in this series.

Wow, you noticed that too. By the way Ginobili never had that crown check Nash, Fisher, sometimes even Shaq who weighs to much to fall when certain players run into him.

[Sauru]

Maybe they should just suspend me if I'm that dirty.

Do you have any solid evidence to back that claim up?

yesterday i saw you picking your nose and someone in thailand died.

sauru, who doesn't flop? I love nash, he's a canadian, has all the qualities of a great true pg with heart. but don't tell me he doesn't flop like a fish with diarhea on its way to the frying pan. yao ming drops like a newborn babe as soon as he hears a whistle, and this isn't something new. remember miller? divac? the jazz? you can go as far back as tape exists.

if you're saying they flop more and more easily now.... well, one can argue that way way back they didnt dare flop as much or as easily, because the rules weren't as soft. they knew they wouldn't get the call if they did. soft rules, soft flops.

i think you misunderstood my comments, or at least thought they were directed to the spurs. i am talking about flopping overall, by everyone who does it in the league. its the single biggest problem imo. they need to stop it. also, did you watch the nets game last night? kidd flat out showed what i am talking about when an offensive player jumps into the defensive player and gets to the line when they cause the contact. kidd got crushed and the crowd went crazy but kidd caused all the contact, yet he got to the line.

[Andrew]

they also need to put a stop to the offensive player jumping into the defensive player and getting the foul that way. i cant even count how many times i see a defender jump straight up on a pump fake then see the offensive player jump forward after getting the defender into the air to draw a foul.

Absolutely, I hate that call as well. A similar call I dislike is the practice of the offensive player dropping his shoulder into the defender on a drive to initiate a contact and making a fairly easy lineup while drawing the three point play. Continuations are also pretty sketchy with some players getting away with a step or even a couple of dribbles before attempting a shot or layup for the two shot foul or three point play while at other times the attempt is waved off and it's a non-shooting foul.

[Sauru]

i agree with the continuation thing, i dont know how many times i see a player get hit, take his 2 steps then shoot, and they call basket good. its pretty bad imo

[magius]

i'll play devil's advocate here for a moment.

it is all well and good to say take away these silly flops, but the more important question is very simply - how?

how do you define these so called 'miscalls' or 'bad calls' or whatever you may call them in any concrete terms? don't jump into the player? what dictates jumping into the player? how truly, more than they can now, can a ref actually SEE what is what in the speed of the play? don't stick your foot out to draw a foul while shooting? don't initiate contact to draw a foul? how do you KNOW? how do you KNOW that is not just how they shoot? how do you KNOW that is not a follow through? continuation only if it REALLY looks like it was?

how do you KNOW these things, unless you place the utter foundation of the rules on a ref's common sense?

isn't that, in some cases, rather subjective? as it is some of the rules are more general - which indeed allow for certain flops that are alluded to, and yes, to be sure, questionable calls are made.... but to place it into the refs hands even more is PERHAPS playing with fire. In which case so many calls or miscalls, whichever they may be, would be subject to incredible outlash. they (the calls) already, quite obviously, are, but to allow a greater degree of subjectivity, a greater degree of 'common sense,' im not sure if it will work. after all, i hope we can all agree on this at least, for every man's opinion there is another who thinks completely otherwise; people say "use your common sense!!!" but what they really mean is "use MY common sense!"

this is part of why the flop exists, imo, in EVERY pro game, no more, no less; you already put so much into the refs hand, so much is already so subjective. to truly take away the flop you have to make it even MORE subjective (and of course the ref would have to be completely omniscient and always, without doubt, right), which imo is lose lose. because of this the rules must be absolutely concrete (for example, absolutely zero contact), unfortunately for every concrete rule there is a counter.

If you can find real answers to some of these questions, you can fix a lot more than just basketball.

i don't know, perhaps you could do what tennis does and allow a certain amount of 'challenges' per game or a quarter. a challenge being the refs are forced to watch the play again via video replay, and then either agree or change the decision. the only problem is that could change the tempo of the game if it forces a stop in play, and possibly a fastbreak oppurtunity.

[Andrew]

Flops are admittedly difficult to police. The talk about issuing technical fouls for flopping that's come up in the last few months seems like a good idea on one hand but I can also see it turning out much the way the Zero Tolerance policy has been enforced with flops being arbitrarily punished to make a point while at other times players can flop as much as ever.

With continuation fouls, I think you can draw a more distinct line. As Sauru said you sometimes see players take a couple of steps and complete a layup after the whistle is blown and in rare cases players are allowed a dribble or two before a made layup and it's still called a continuation. That can be cleaned up by establishing a clear standard such as a player who takes steps or dribbles the ball will not be considered to be in the act of shooting. So long as the rules outline what is considered to be in the act of shooting the referees should be able to make a consistent ruling.

Shooting fouls where the offensive player initiates contact would be a little trickier but you could still outline certain standards and conditions. For example, if a defender has his hands straight up and his feet set or jumps straight up and the offensive player jumps into him to initiate contact, it could be grounds for a good non-call or even a charging foul rather than a cheap three point play opportunity. That's a call they used to make (I remember Allan Houston being pretty upset about one in the 1999 NBA Finals) but they tend to give the player with the ball the benefit of the doubt more often these days.

I realise that's not a perfect solution because at the end of the day the referees are still going to have use their own judgement (Was he moving? Did he have his feet set? and so on) which means players, coaches and fans are still going to get upset about calls. But if you establish a standard such as a player not being considered in the act of shooting if he takes a couple of steps/dribbles or an offensive player not being able to drop his shoulder into a defender who has established position and has his arms raised straight up and immediately draw a shooting foul then the calls should be more consistent, particularly continuations.

[Sauru]

i do not want to see the offensive player getting called for the foul for jumping into the defender, i would like to just see the good old no call. happens on drives alot too, a player dips his shoulder and runs into the defender and gets to the line, and in most cases since he hit the defender and knocked him off balance he has a easy shot for the and 1. i agree its very hard to make these calls, and the flop is pretty hard to call, harder than the rest of the problems talked about in this thread, but sometimes its as clear as clear can be. the sad thing is i have seen players in my mens league do the flop and even though it does not work nearly as well as in the nba, it still gets them to the line now and then. i mean the flop has become such a huge part of the game that should be this years big improvement to live, the ability to flop to try and get to the line when you miss. the nba seriously needs to look into it and try something, anything, to fix it. my solution? i dont know. i will not sit here and claim to know what should be done to fix this or any of these problems, if i knew, i would be making alot more money than i am now. what i do know though is that its a problem and there needs to be a solution to it.

[Andrew]

The most appropriate punishment for a flop would be a non-call in my opinion. Of course, it still comes down to being able to distinguish between a flop and legitimate contact that merits an offensive foul call. I'm not sure exactly where you could draw the line or set a certain standard for that. I suppose the non-call could be considered a more viable option in situations that are assessed as being charges or blocking fouls depending on the referee's judgement. The advantage of going for a non-call more often would be that a blocking foul still results in the play being disrupted or forcing the offensive player to knock down free throws whereas a non-call would likely leave an open path to the basket or a wide open jumpshot. Players would probably be less inclined to flop so freely if it placed them at a disadvantage. Then again, simply making the foul call in favour of the player with the ball more often could achieve the same result.

As far as offensive fouls on initiated contact are concerned, I was talking about instances where players blatantly drop their shoulder into the defender to clear them out and draw a shooting foul. Otherwise, I'm in favour of the non-call.

[Sauru]

imo, i think the refs should view the tapes, see who flops, and flops alot, then use that when watching the games. this is what they do with players who get technicals alot. once a player has a rep for doing something it sticks. say we labeled manu a flopper(clearly is) or anyone else i will use manu for now. the refs see on tape time and time again that he is flopping around for no good reason. now he gets the label of a flopper so the refs can look closer, more intent, and try to determine if it was really a foul or another flop. sure this way will lead to no calls on plays where manu actually got fouled, but thats the price a player would have to pay for becoming a known flopper.

[maes]

i mean the flop has become such a huge part of the game that should be this years big improvement to live, the ability to flop to try and get to the line when you miss.

That would have been fitting in 07 with Wade on the cover =)

[Sauru]

lmao, good point

[Andrew]

imo, i think the refs should view the tapes, see who flops, and flops alot, then use that when watching the games. this is what they do with players who get technicals alot. once a player has a rep for doing something it sticks. say we labeled manu a flopper(clearly is) or anyone else i will use manu for now. the refs see on tape time and time again that he is flopping around for no good reason. now he gets the label of a flopper so the refs can look closer, more intent, and try to determine if it was really a foul or another flop. sure this way will lead to no calls on plays where manu actually got fouled, but thats the price a player would have to pay for becoming a known flopper.

That could work, though no doubt there'd be accusations of specifc players being targeted.

[shadowgrin]

Official 'Flop' statistics for 2006-2007 season

[Its_asdf]

Wow Varejo on the top of the list. Suprising.

[Andrew]

I'm surprised Ginobili is so low on that list. Whether you want to accuse him of flopping or not, he does have a knack for drawing charges so 31 seems quite low. Still, I'd argue that a reputation as a flopper is built on the nature of drawing charges rather than the number of charges drawn alone.