Printable View
I don't know where you're coming from. If you break the rules on purpose then you're cheating.Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
What has the penalty award to the opposition got to do with anything.
Sometimes the cheat gets away with it and the offence goes unpunished - does this mean that the player is no longer a cheat. Of course not, it just means that he got away with it. The penalising of a cheat is irrelevant, it is knowingly commiting an offence against the rules which is important.
As I said, if I go up to block a shot, there is no distinction if I went for the other players arm or the ball....yet I may hit his arm.Quote:
Originally Posted by manker
Soccer has the same stuff in it. Fellas are kicked in shins and whatnot ALL the time...but most of the time it is deemed "not a penalty because it was legitimate play on the ball."
Yet in the rules, and this is sans the shoulder to shoulder contact, the ball must be contacted first. This is pervasive in soccer.
Busy, look, we're talking about cheating now. The offence itself and the punishment are irrelevant, the only thing that matters is the intent of the player to break the rules.Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
If a soccer player kicks a player in the shins on purpose then he is cheating because that's against the rules. If you go up to block a shot and deliberately hit the player's arm then you're cheating.
If a soccer player takes a swipe at the ball but misses and kicks another player in the shin then it is an offence but not cheating, because it was an accident, if you go up to block a shot by putting your hand in front of the ball but miss and hit the guy's arm instead then that's an offence but not cheating because you tried to play within the rules.
If a soccer player tackles someone, takes the ball first and follows thro' by kicking that player's shin then it isn't cheating nor a foul, if you go up to block a shot and succeed with no contact to the opponant whatsoever then (obviously) it's not cheating nor an offence.
How much plainer do you want it.
Uh, dude....'cause you are arguing intention.Quote:
Originally Posted by manker
The rule is the rule. Too much contact results in a foul.
Great, we've got to the point where you can't refute what I say so you make illegible comments which mean nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
You can read.Quote:
Originally Posted by manker
You've honed on cheating which happens in all sports yet made it a basketball exclusive.
Whether a foul is intentional or not means not one jot and is irrelevent (this of course depends on the type of foul).
Soccer refs ignore this cheating which happens way more in the sport than basketball. If you kick a player before the ball is contacted, that's against the rules.
Yet it goes on. Get off the high horse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Busy
I've said it goes on in all sports and made a particular example about my favourite sport - nay, favourite team!Quote:
Originally Posted by me
I'm not on any high horse, I'm merely saying that intentionally breaking the rules is cheating and I'm totally against that practice - in ANY sport.
Earlier you seemed to prefer to delude yourself that it was not cheating. Now it seems that you've decided that it is cheating. Good, good.
Regarding the basketball exclusive stuff, I got you mixed up with JP. However, with the amount of intentional rule breaking that occurs, that onus is on soccer.Quote:
Originally Posted by manker
In sports, you do what you can get away with within reason (as what happens in real everyday life).
A player shoots a jump shot. If I can tap his elbow to throw the shot off, so be it. He gets his fouls shots to make me pay for it. Call it tricks of the trade. Call it cheating. It disrupts the game not one jot.
Now when a foul is not called....that's another story. :lol: :lol: :lol:
I'll be quick to say, "The refs are cheating for the other team".
Contact sports=games in which intentional offensive physical contact, for example in order to steal the ball/puck/whatever, is allowed according to the rules.
Non-Contact sports=games in which it isn't.
That's all there is to it.
I know people run into each other, and I know there are lots of injuries resulting from physical contact in basketball. But it still doesn't make it a contact sport.
You can crash into people in baseball, cricket (or can't you?), and all kinds of other games too (hell, I bet you can do it in curling if you really try). But the amount of unintentional contact, or contact outside of the rules, doesn't change the definition of the game.
Basketball may even be a violent game, if you choose to play it that way, but that doesn't alter the definition of the game.
No one is disputing that people may get injured or touch each other, busy, it's just that it doesn't happen in such a way that you can call it a contact-sport.
You are wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by SnnY
See my earlier posts regarding post-up play.
A sport such as tennis involves absolutely no player-to-player contact in it's gameplay. Basketball does. :snooty:
Contact in the sport = contact sport. :)
No
Contact (like the one I described) in the rules = contact sport :P
Contact in the sport = a sport where people sometimes come into contact with each other, can be non-contact or contact.
:lol:
I reckon we both know what the other means now, so I reckon we can be done with this.
I'm right, though :snooty:
No Snny. Basketball has intentional contact within the rules.Quote:
Originally Posted by SnnY
No, we've already been over this, it doesn't have the kind of contact that merits the "contact-sport" defintion.
Done, 'k?
What do you mean?Quote:
Originally Posted by SnnY
In the rules, intentional contact is ok.
If you wish to take the position that deliberately breaking the rules is not cheating, fair enough.
However that smacks of a "win at all costs, if you get away with it then it's OK" mentality. I have to observe that this would be consistent with your previous posts.
Sry bud I ain't prim and propa and neither is the world.Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
It isn't win at all costs. The fouls are touch fouls not knocking someone on their ass.
This is win at all costs mentality. That shit is frowned upon.
I wonder if you have even seen a basketball game.
Did say to yourself..."How can they purposely give up a foul? That team is cheating."
Look at this geeksquad member that I had to sit beside at the game...
http://images.snapfish.com/343968952...67623584ot1lsi
He and his friend had me laughing the whole time!!! :lol: :lol:
(and yes, that is a Bud Light Nasal Strip which he procured from his plastic bottle)
The rules you cited were rules regarding maintaining a defense position. (unless I've missed something and you've gone and posted some groundbreaking new rules.) they were also considered exceptions, which would make them inconsequential when defining the game anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
If you happen to touch someone then, it's not the same thing as taking the ball with a tackle in a contact sport, like, say, football.
Those rules are there so the offensive player can't force you to back off when you are trying to block him. they aren't there to allow the kind of contact that would make it a contact sport, but rather to say that it's ok if you happen to touch him when he's moving against you. It doesn't mean that you are allowed to try and touch him.
But you knoes this, so I don't know why you persist.
It's intentional contact. You are also able to smack a hand that's in contact with the ball.Quote:
Originally Posted by SnnY
It's intentional contact = contact sport.
Awwwwwwwwwww.
You can't let the exception define the rule. We've done this :mellow:
But an exception is a rule. :blink: When you look up the rules, it's right in there..that and the hand thingie.Quote:
Originally Posted by manker
In soccer no contact is allowed except shoulder to shoulder and the ball must be hit first.
Well that's total rubbish.Quote:
Originally Posted by Busy
As for the rest; :frusty:
Well then soccer rules are total rubbish.Quote:
Originally Posted by manker
That basically sums up your views in this thread.
'Because I said so'
Well I said something that's in soccer rules and you then say it's rubbish.Quote:
Originally Posted by manker
Yet you quote instances of no contact of NBA rules. :blink:
Then when contact rules are quoted for the NBA you basically say, "Well those don't count." :pinch:
:shit:
That rule, which you presumably made up, does not exist.
There is so very much more contact allowed than that in soccer. I thought you'd watched the odd game.
You aren't supposed to try and smack someone's hand in basketball :rolleyes: we'd get fouled for that in a jiffy, if they thought we'd done it on purpose.
Aimed for the other player's hand rather than the ball, that is.
And the rules you've cited do not count for perfectly obvious reasons.
There's a huge difference between standing still and being run into, compared to tackling or otherwise touching someone in an offensive fashion.
If the offensive player has the ball in his right and the defensive player smacks the offensive players right hand to steal the ball it is perfectly fine.Quote:
Originally Posted by SnnY
Wtf are you talking about...watching the game...that's irrelevent.Quote:
Originally Posted by manker
It's in the rules. :dry:
Yes, but the defensive player isn't allowed to smack (, punch, kick, bite, molest, or otherwise) touch the offensive player's hand with any intent other than going for the ball. If he does smack the opponents hand and it's blatantly obvious that he wasn't trying to hit the ball but rather the hand, then it's a foul.Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
When the ball is in contact with the hand it's considered part of the ball.Quote:
Originally Posted by SnnY
The rules don't have an intent distinction. There isn't a mind reader. :dry:
I don't know how to smack a hand that's in contact with the ball without there being the assumption of anything other than going for the ball.
Nevertheless the smacked hand results in contact.
Feck awf. Yeah, I see your point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
However, my main assertions stand. The general rule is that you're not allowed to make intentional contact in Basketball and deliberately breaking the rules is cheating in any sport.
The above will withstand any amount of roddage and subterfuge :D
Yes, it may well do, but not the kind of contact you get in a contact sport.Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
If it's obvious you are hitting the other player's hand, and not the ball, on purpose, it's a foul. If it isn't obvious, then the referee will have to assume the contact is unintentional, which it should be. Therefore, the possibility of a player smacking another player's hand when trying to get at the ball won't change the fact that basketball isn't a contact sport.
In contrast, tackling another player in football (either kind) who is in possession of the ball is allowed even though it may be clearly obvious that the player performing the tackle is aiming at the other player and not directly at the ball. Thus football is a contact sport.
:lol: :lol: :lol: Did you steal manballs rod.Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
Cool.Quote:
Originally Posted by manker
You are allowed to make intentional contact in basketball as well. It is part of the rules. It is part of general play. Intention when a rule is broken, especially in basketball, is irrelevant. The rules are not mind readers.
:blink: What the feck is that supposed to mean.Quote:
Originally Posted by Busyman
In soccer the rules stipulate that (besides shoulder-to-shoulder contact) contact must be made with the ball first or it is illegal.Quote:
Originally Posted by SnnY
You are wrong.
In basketball, if the other player has the ball (in hand) and I swipe at his hand, the hand is part of the ball. PERIOD.
You are making stuff up that is not in the rules.
Read in context to what was mentioned before then come back.Quote:
Originally Posted by JPaul
Furthermore, wtf's a feck?
Gilbert Arenas Scores 54 and ends the Phoenix Suns' 15-game winning streak
Quote:
The Phoenix Suns went from snowed in to snowed under by Gilbert Arenas on Friday night - and their franchise-best 15-game winning streak is history.
Arenas capped a 54-point night by banking in a 3-pointer from the top of the key with 30.7 seconds left in overtime and the Wizards beat the Suns 144-139.
He didn't call bank, he said, but wasn't surprised it went in.
"The way I was going," Arenas said, "I knew it was good."
The Wizards have snapped the two longest winning streaks in the league this season, earlier ending Dallas' 11-game string with a victory in Washington.
"That just goes to show you how talented we are," the Wizards' Caron Butler said.
Arenas' output was the second-most points ever scored against Phoenix. Only Wilt Chamberlain scored more, 66 for the Lakers in February 1969 in the Suns' first season.
"He wants to win," Washington coach Eddie Jordan said. "He wants to show he's going to be one of the greatest of all time."
Steve Nash matched his career high with 42 points and had 12 assists, and Shawn Marion added 28 points and 13 rebounds for the Suns, who rallied from 15 points down in the second half to send the game into overtime.
But Butler scored 10 of his 34 - one shy of his career best - in the extra session to help Washington to its eighth victory in 10 games.
The Suns arrived a little over two hours before tipoff after being snowed in for two nights in Denver, and couldn't quite overcome an offensive onslaught by Arenas that brought an end to the NBA's longest winning streak in seven seasons.
"It's obviously not ideal to be on a bus for three hours and on a plane and come straight to the arena not smelling our best and not in our pressed linens," Nash said. "But that's the hand we were dealt. Maybe that did us in a bit tonight."
Arenas started the Wizards' four-game western trip with a career-high 60 points against the Lakers and wrapped it up with his second-best career output.
He converted a three-point play after he was fouled on a running one-handed 9-foot bank shot to tie it at 127 with 20.9 seconds to play in regulation. Nash missed a 3-pointer, then Marion and Amare Stoudemire missed rebound attempts and the game went into overtime.
"We had our chances," Suns coach Mike D'Antoni said, "and didn't get it done in regulation. You have to give Gilbert Arenas credit. He made some big shots."
Arenas, admittedly carrying a grudge after being cut from the U.S. team for this year's world championships, pounded his chest and appeared to stare into the stands at Jerry Colangelo several times after making big plays. Colangelo, the Suns' chairman and ex-owner, is the head of USA Basketball.
He also stared down D'Antoni after sinking a 37-footer at the first-quarter buzzer. But Arenas said he was not upset with D'Antoni and insisted he didn't even know Colangelo was in the building.
"When you're on fire, you're on fire," Arenas said of his showmanship. "We've shown the world that we can compete with these good teams out here."
In a game that resembled the Suns' 161-157 double-overtime thriller at New Jersey on Dec. 7, Arenas was 21-of-37 from the field, 6-of-12 on 3-pointers.
The sixth of Nash's seven 3-pointers - in 15 attempts - tied it at 134 with 1:20 left in overtime, but Butler scored inside to put Phoenix ahead 136-134 1:04 from the finish.
Phoenix took a 131-128 lead early on the overtime on Stoudemire's inside basket, but he missed the free throw for what would have been a three-point play, then Arenas sank a 22-footer to cut it to 131-130. Butler's eight-footer put Washington up 139-134 with 30.7 seconds to go.
The lead changed hands 10 times in a torrid 4-minute span in the fourth quarter before Marion's 12-footer put Phoenix ahead 119-117 with 2:14 to play. After Stoudemire blocked Butler's shot, Nash made two free throws to boost it 121-117 with 1:59 left.
Jarvis Hayes sank a 3-pointer to cut the lead to 123-122 with 1:04 left, then Stoudemire's reverse stuff made it 125-122. Arenas made two free throws to cut it to 125-124 with 36.6 seconds to play.
Nash sank two more free throws to boost the lead to 127-124 with 23.9 seconds left.
The Suns had to take a three-hour bus ride to Colorado Springs to meet their charter flight back home on Friday. They arrived at U.S. Airways Center at 6:15 p.m., 2 hours and 15 minutes before tipoff. ^
Notes:
Phoenix is 33-4 at home against Eastern Conference teams since Nash joined the Suns in 2004, and two of the losses have been to Washington. ... The Wizards topped 100 points for the 10th consecutive game. ... Arenas was 6-for-11 shooting in the first quarter, 4-of-6 on 3-pointers. ... Jumaine Jones, who hadn't played in the last five games for Phoenix, saw action in the second quarter. ... D'Antoni and Nash each drew technical fouls.
Weird too that this thread had
basketball is not a contact sport
and it's brand of foulage is the worst cheating (but did anyone see this past World "Flopforapenalty" Cup?).
:blink: