PDA

View Full Version : NBA Reviewing Jeff Foster fouls



idioteque
04-22-2011, 01:13 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/nba/news/story?id=6409539

The NBA is reviewing two hits Indiana Pacers center Jeff Foster leveled against the Chicago Bulls during Game 3 of their Eastern Conference quarterfinals series on Thursday, according to a league spokesman.

Foster banged into Derrick Rose in the third quarter when the Bulls guard was driving the lane. Rose also was hit by Tyler Hansbrough on the play. Rose responded emotionally by getting in the face of Foster, who was called for the foul.

"He's so fast, I just went in there and ended up hitting him," Foster said. "He reacted. It's the playoffs. I'm sure he's going to get hit plenty of times."

Rose called the foul "a little irritating" but didn't seem angry after the game. "That's his job," Rose said. "But you have to stand up to it. I was just trying to go to the basket and create contact."

Later in the quarter, Foster dropped an elbow to the head of Luol Deng and drew a foul.

Neither play resulted in a flagrant call.

"This is the playoffs. There are going to be hard fouls," Bulls coach Tom Thibodeau said. "In my eyes, that's what they've been doing the whole series. They're fouling hard. That's part of the game. When it crosses over the line, I think the officials will make the call.

"I have a lot of respect for Foster. He's a hard playing guy, a tough guy. He's been a good player in this league for a long time."

ESPNChicago.com's Mark Montieth contributed to this report.

daschysta
04-22-2011, 01:21 PM
Well if he's going in looking for contact i'd prefer a good hard foul over a touch foul that does nothing to stop him from scoring and still sends him to the line....

I hope we don't get soft inside because of this, it's game four do or die...

ECKrueger
04-22-2011, 01:21 PM
Waste of time.

Young
04-22-2011, 01:30 PM
I really don't think Foster's fouls have crossed the line. Hard? Yes. The Bulls have fouled hard too though. Noah and the rest of their big guys are not soft. Of course we don't have a superstar that people want to protect so it doesn't get noticed.

The player they need to review is Carlos Boozer. It's not his hard fouls but his dirty play. He gives cheap shot after cheap shot. The foul he had on Tyler in game 1 was dirty (not hard but dirty). Tyler is on the break and dunks it and Boozer pushes him from behind. That was dirty.

daschysta
04-22-2011, 01:32 PM
I really don't think Foster's fouls have crossed the line. Hard? Yes. The Bulls have fouled hard too though. Noah and the rest of their big guys are not soft. Of course we don't have a superstar that people want to protect so it doesn't get noticed.

The player they need to review is Carlos Boozer. It's not his hard fouls but his dirty play. He gives cheap shot after cheap shot. The foul he had on Tyler in game 1 was dirty (not hard but dirty). Tyler is on the break and dunks it and Boozer pushes him from behind. That was dirty.

Boozer is incapable of boxing out or rebounding without using his forearms liberally and shoving players out of the way.

Hicks
04-22-2011, 01:33 PM
I think Jeff's fouls have been the perfect balance between soft and just trying to hurt people. In other words, playoff fouls.

Rose and Tom's quotes tell you how pointless this review is.

Roaming Gnome
04-22-2011, 01:43 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/nba/news/story?id=6409539
ESPNChicago.com's Mark Montieth contributed to this report.


I didn't know he was a member of the Chicago media.... :bunny:

That's about the only thing I think is worthwhile from this story!

joew8302
04-22-2011, 01:50 PM
Wow, this just shows how soft the game is becoming. Compared to some hits I have seen the Oak Tree and Davis Bros land this was a love tap.

dal9
04-22-2011, 01:59 PM
<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="560" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/3L57dfe9Pco?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

i think it could go either way....which means it is going to end up going against us

edit: deng traveled lol

Trophy
04-22-2011, 02:14 PM
Why? Whats there to review?

Everyone is fine.

BillS
04-22-2011, 02:18 PM
Why? Whats there to review?

Everyone is fine.

The cynic in me says the series has been too close so there needs to be something done to reduce the Pacers' chances even more.

I'm expecting Jeff to be suspended for tomorrow night's game. If it was, oh, say, Boozer hitting someone in the head with an elbow while trying to push him away, now THAT would not be a flagrant or a suspension.

Since86
04-22-2011, 02:19 PM
The cynic in me says the series has been too close so there needs to be something done to reduce the Pacers' chances even more.

Remind me again why we argued about the officials again?

Sparhawk
04-22-2011, 02:24 PM
The cynic in me says the series has been too close so there needs to be something done to reduce the Pacers' chances even more.

I'm expecting Jeff to be suspended for tomorrow night's game. If it was, oh, say, Boozer hitting someone in the head with an elbow while trying to push him away, now THAT would not be a flagrant or a suspension.

Of course not, it would have been a blocking foul on us or some other defensive foul called.

/of course I'm not really serious.

RWB
04-22-2011, 02:28 PM
<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="560" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/3L57dfe9Pco?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

i think it could go either way....which means it is going to end up going against us

edit: deng traveled lol

Looks like he was going for the ball to me. Someone needs to prove otherwise.

dal9
04-22-2011, 02:33 PM
Why? Whats there to review?

Everyone is fine.

correct me if im wrong, but an intentional elbow to the head is a suspension, whether or not someone got hurt.

there is no way to tell from that video whether there was intent there or not.

aside from hooking jeff up to a polygraph, there isn't going to be an answer to that question.

so whoever is reviewing the tape will have to make a determination, and he will be influenced by his biases (whether unconscious or not)...now deng is not some huge star, but i doubt that the backup center on the eighth seed is going to get any kind of benefit of the doubt on a call like that...however, it does help at least that jeff is a vet (and again, that the NBA's revenue stream isn't dependent on the volume of jersey sales in Sudan)

BillS
04-22-2011, 02:33 PM
Remind me again why we argued about the officials again?

Because the cynic in me isn't always rational?

And that discussion was about bias for decisions on the floor, which this is not about.

rock747
04-22-2011, 02:33 PM
Typical NBA Bull****. Jeff will probably be suspended. He doesn't play for Chicago.

Dr. Hibbert
04-22-2011, 02:37 PM
I suppose they'll be reviewing Boozer too. Right? Right?

Sigh. The post-90s NBA is pretty lame.

IndyHoya
04-22-2011, 02:39 PM
correct me if im wrong, but an intentional elbow to the head is a suspension, whether or not someone got hurt.

there is no way to tell from that video whether there was intent there or not.

aside from hooking jeff up to a polygraph, there isn't going to be an answer to that question.

so whoever is reviewing the tape will have to make a determination, and he will be influenced by his biases (whether unconscious or not)...now deng is not some huge star, but i doubt that the backup center on the eighth seed is going to get any kind of benefit of the doubt on a call like that...however, it does help at least that jeff is a vet (and again, that the NBA's revenue stream isn't dependent on the volume of jersey sales in Sudan)

So do we review Thomas' elbow to Hansborough too?

RWB
04-22-2011, 02:41 PM
So do we review Thomas' elbow to Hansborough too?

And in that situation we've got a guy with one ugly ear to back up the take down.

Stryder
04-22-2011, 02:44 PM
correct me if im wrong, but an intentional elbow to the head is a suspension, whether or not someone got hurt.

there is no way to tell from that video whether there was intent there or not.

aside from hooking jeff up to a polygraph, there isn't going to be an answer to that question.

so whoever is reviewing the tape will have to make a determination, and he will be influenced by his biases (whether unconscious or not)...now deng is not some huge star, but i doubt that the backup center on the eighth seed is going to get any kind of benefit of the doubt on a call like that...however, it does help at least that jeff is a vet (and again, that the NBA's revenue stream isn't dependent on the volume of jersey sales in Sudan)

Just wanted to say polygraphs are junk science. Oh, and Jeff Foster's fouls weren't that hard at all....as someone said previously, it just shows how soft the league has become...that is all.

Rogco
04-22-2011, 02:49 PM
And in that situation we've got a guy with one ugly ear to back up the take down.

Thomas got a one game suspension for that. HA! Of course not.

Quick question, there was a foul called on Hans when it looked like Boozer just hit him in the face. I was at the game and missed the replay, but was watching Hans when it happened and it really looked like Boozer purposely just hit him in the face. To be honest I was a fairly long way up in the balcony. Anyone know what I'm talking about and have a replay? Thanks

indygeezer
04-22-2011, 02:52 PM
Yeah...I'm gonna intentionally hit someone on the top of the head with my elbow.

PR07
04-22-2011, 03:09 PM
Those fouls weren't even that bad. Somewhere Dale Davis is shaking his head...

BringJackBack
04-22-2011, 03:12 PM
If they are seriously reviewing this, **** this league.

dal9
04-22-2011, 03:23 PM
So do we review Thomas' elbow to Hansborough too?
i don't see why not, actually

Gold
04-22-2011, 03:24 PM
Rridiculous. None of those fouls were intentional. When foster hit Deng's head, it was mostly from Foster getting his lower body taken out from under him. So what does EVERYONE do when that happens? You put your arms down to try to save yourself and he managed to hit Deng on the head. Foul on Rose? It was hard yes and he nearly close-lined him but he went after the ball completely. Now I do think these are kind of worthy for review... but what about all the bulls fouls if they're going to review fosters?

Nothing after Hansbrough gets hit in the TEMPLE by Thomas? That's extremely dangerous. Don't tell me the seriously have never investigated that. Nothing about Boozer throwing that elbow at Hansbrough last game where Hansbrough got called for a foul?

Where are the reviews on those? Why does Foster have to get reviewed and not the placement of camera men? Is this about protecting players, or is this only about protecting the bulls players? Come on now.

I call shenanigans if they seriously never looked into any of those things.

Since86
04-22-2011, 03:34 PM
Because the cynic in me isn't always rational?

And that discussion was about bias for decisions on the floor, which this is not about.

The thread discussed more than just that one single point. Hicks straight up asked the question on what percentage people thought it was possible Stern dictated the way officials officiated the games.

So no, the discussion wasn't just about decisions on the floor. It was about the whole topic of the NBA and their treatment of superstar players and the teams that they play for.


This right here is why the discussion has merit, and why it should take place. It's absolutely ridiculous to look into his fouls.

We foul harder during our pickup games on match point.

I think it's even more ridiculous that some think the discussion about the leagues treatment of star players shouldn't take place. Or UB's assertion that the league doesn't favor starplayers. That is mindboggling.

Scot Pollard
04-22-2011, 03:40 PM
"Oh no not my baby Derrick Rose" - David Stern

Stern has got to go. What a joke.

Eleazar
04-22-2011, 03:51 PM
Thomas got a one game suspension for that. HA! Of course not.

Quick question, there was a foul called on Hans when it looked like Boozer just hit him in the face. I was at the game and missed the replay, but was watching Hans when it happened and it really looked like Boozer purposely just hit him in the face. To be honest I was a fairly long way up in the balcony. Anyone know what I'm talking about and have a replay? Thanks

The replay clearly showed Boozer pushed Hasnbrough because Boozer bumped into Hasnrbough who had already established position. Boozer was the only player to commit a foul, and it should have been a technical foul.

Brad8888
04-22-2011, 04:06 PM
There was nothing wrong with those fouls, any more than there has been anything wrong with Boozer's repeated cheap shots at Hansbrough.

That said, my reaction last night after the second one was that Jeff might be in trouble with the league because there had been two overtly aggressive fouls by today's standards, even in the playoffs. It would be wrong for them to do anything but fine him, and even that would be excessive in light of the physicality of the series.

Unfortunately, I look for the officials to be completely different for game 4 and that they are going to magically start calling everything as if it is still regular season. That will potentially lead to an explosion by Rose and Deng, and a blowout loss for the Pacers whether Jeff is suspended or not, which I so hope doesn't happen because it would ruin an otherwise great series. :(

Hicks
04-22-2011, 04:11 PM
Looking at that clip, I can see why they think it might have been intentional. If I'm being honest. He starts to go for the ball, then for some reason starts to pull away from the ball on the way back down.... which leaves his elbow coming right on top of Deng's head.

I was going to say that maybe Jeff was trying to avoid the foul at the last split-second once he realized he wasn't going to get the block, but then if that's the case, why still swing so hard?

RWB
04-22-2011, 04:23 PM
Hardest foul of the night was Noah swinging his elbows and hurting air. :D

Since86
04-22-2011, 04:23 PM
I can't see the clip, due to work restrictions, so I'm working off memory.

He swings so hard because he can't let him get an AND-1 call. That's why playoff fouls are so hard, because the premium on every possession. It's not about just beating the other team up, it's also about not letting them finish the play.

Especially for an NBA player. They're so big and so strong that they're going to absorb incidential contact. So if you're going to foul them, you better foul them hard enough so they can't keep going and get more points on you.

Players have been taught since their Jr days, that if you're going to foul then you better not let them score. That idea just gets magnified and executed a little harder as the stakes rise.

Unclebuck
04-22-2011, 04:29 PM
Looks like he was going for the ball to me. Someone needs to prove otherwise.


Whether the defender goes for the ball or not means nothing. That is not a factor and not in the rule book in the NBA. Flagrant 1 is unecessary contact, flagrant 2 is unnecessary and excessive. A player could "go for the ball" and commit a flagrant 2.

Also whether it was intentional or not means nothing, that is not in the NBA rulebook either

I think Jeff should have been called for a flagrant 1 last night, he hit Rose in the head area with an elbow

RWB
04-22-2011, 04:36 PM
Whether the defender goes for the ball or not means nothing. That is not a facor and not in the rule book in the NBA. Flagrant 1 is unecessary contact, flagrant 2 is unnecessary and excessive. A player could "go for the ball" and commit a flagrant 2.

Also whether it was intentional or not means nothing, that is not in the NBA rulebook either

I think Jeff should have been called for a flagrant 1 last night, he hit Rose in the head area with an elbow

Sure, I'm going under the assumption and excuse they are looking to give Jeff the day off. Flagrant 1 last night would be justified (Deng foul), but more than that with a suspension then I want to see Kurt Thomas gone for a game too.

JB24
04-22-2011, 04:38 PM
Boozer's attempt to take away Hansborough's legs in the first game was the dirtiest in the series imo, as it's the only one that was irrefutably dirty. Foster's and Thomas' elbows are debatable.

It sucks that the way a player reacts/falls down decides whether or not a review is merited.

Eleazar
04-22-2011, 04:52 PM
Sure, I'm going under the assumption and excuse they are looking to give Jeff the day off. Flagrant 1 last night would be justified (Deng foul), but more than that with a suspension then I want to see Kurt Thomas gone for a game too.

Right now the only player that deserves to be suspended is Boozer.

Hicks
04-22-2011, 04:59 PM
I can't see the clip, due to work restrictions, so I'm working off memory.

He swings so hard because he can't let him get an AND-1 call.

I was going to disagree with this, because Jeff is swinging/pulling-away-from the ball, but when I went back to the clip just now, he DOES still completely nail Deng's off hand/arm, so maybe that's all it was.

Hicks
04-22-2011, 05:01 PM
Whether the defender goes for the ball or not means nothing. That is not a factor and not in the rule book in the NBA. Flagrant 1 is unecessary contact, flagrant 2 is unnecessary and excessive. A player could "go for the ball" and commit a flagrant 2.

Well, I think it's been said before that one of the ways an official decides if contact was necessary or not depends on if he feels the defender was trying to get to the ball as opposed to just 'randomly' whacking the guy.

Stryder
04-22-2011, 05:15 PM
I'm just going to say that just because there was contact, it doesn't mean that was a foul...might pertain to this case; might not...

Oh well, in the grand scheme of things, the NBA game as we know it today is SOFT.

ChristianDudley
04-22-2011, 05:46 PM
This league is freaking ridiculous...some slightly more than soft fouls occur and they review it like we tried to murder someone. If it weren't against the NBA's new overrated pretty boy and his #1 team, they wouldn't even talk about reviewing these fouls. The ones that need to be reviewed are the fouls from Boozer and Kurt Thomas on Hansbrough--now those are malicious!!! I think it's hilarious how soft Rose and the Bulls are--no way will they win a championship EVER. Time for them to rebuild, for real. Rose = HIGHLY overrated. Can't wait for Dwight Howard to REALLY land a nasty foul on Rose!!!!!! :D :D :D :D :D

ECKrueger
04-22-2011, 06:03 PM
Supposedly both are being upgraded to flagrant 1

IndyHoya
04-22-2011, 06:03 PM
Hardest foul of the night was Noah swinging his elbows and hurting air. :D

True. Noah likes to be all demonstrative with his pointy elbows. Someday he'll swing them at the wrong guy and he'll find himself on the floor, sans his scrunchy, with his luxuriant hair all free and loose - like a chick in a Breck commercial.

Sandman21
04-22-2011, 06:05 PM
And they'll be reviewing the work of the refs in....

Oh yeah, thats right, Stern thinks the refs can do no wrong.... When it benefits his chosen ones......

Fishhawk
04-22-2011, 06:12 PM
Sometimes its hard to admit your own player is a cheap shot artist, but we all know Foster has made a career of hitting people. That shot to Dang's head was obviously flagrant. He went directly for Dang's head with his elbow. If the league doesn't suspend Jeff, things will get way out of hand Saturday.

IndyHoya
04-22-2011, 06:13 PM
And they'll be reviewing the work of the refs in....

Oh yeah, thats right, Stern thinks the refs can do no wrong.... When it benefits his chosen ones......

As usual, all "reviews" are by unnamed people, done in private, without any public scrutiny or transparency, with arbitrary penalties, and without appeal.

The NBA's management sucks.

BlueNGold
04-22-2011, 06:18 PM
Wow, this just shows how soft the game is becoming. Compared to some hits I have seen the Oak Tree and Davis Bros land this was a love tap.

It's absolutely ridiculous. They should just put dresses on. They would probably arrest Rik Mahorn for some of the fouls he committed in the early 90's.

BillS
04-22-2011, 06:26 PM
Supposedly both are being upgraded to flagrant 1

2 F1s is an ejection, is it a suspension for the next game?

BlueNGold
04-22-2011, 06:26 PM
This league is freaking ridiculous...some slightly more than soft fouls occur and they review it like we tried to murder someone. If it weren't against the NBA's new overrated pretty boy and his #1 team, they wouldn't even talk about reviewing these fouls. The ones that need to be reviewed are the fouls from Boozer and Kurt Thomas on Hansbrough--now those are malicious!!! I think it's hilarious how soft Rose and the Bulls are--no way will they win a championship EVER. Time for them to rebuild, for real. Rose = HIGHLY overrated. Can't wait for Dwight Howard to REALLY land a nasty foul on Rose!!!!!! :D :D :D :D :D

Yes, Boozer is blatantly fouling. His style is basically dirty and sometimes there appears to be an intent to hurt. One example was the push in the back when Tyler had a fast break. But Boozer's antics are usually off the ball so the refs don't pay attention to it.

Foster has been a little rough in a couple instances but not on the play that set Rose off. Rose simply ran into Jeff and while Jeff looks thin he is simply an immovable object. There is no one in the league right now that can just push Foster out of the way. I don't even think Dwight can do that. Back in the day when Shaq was in his prime, that was about the only guy Jeff couldn't check adequately in the post. Again, Jeff's looks are very deceiving.

BlueNGold
04-22-2011, 06:29 PM
2 F1s is an ejection, is it a suspension for the next game?

They do that and I hope they put Solo in there to clothesline Rose. Stern is a wussy.

shags
04-22-2011, 06:33 PM
2 F1s is an ejection, is it a suspension for the next game?

Nope. I believe that each player has a certain amount of flagrant points they can receive in the playoffs before they receive a suspension. I'm not sure what the number is, but it's definitely not 2.

Peck
04-22-2011, 06:52 PM
http://www.indystar.com/article/20110422/SPORTS04/110422022/

The two fouls Indiana Pacers center Jeff Foster delivered in Game 3 against the Chicago Bulls have been upgraded to flagrant one fouls, according to a league spokesman.

He won't be suspended for Saturday's Game 4, according to the spokesman.


Foster fouled Bulls forward Luol Deng and guard Derrick Rose on drives to the basket in the half.


Rose took exception to Foster's foul because it was the second time in the series that he's taken a hard shot from the Pacers veteran big man.


"I thought they were good, clean playoff fouls," Pacers interim coach Frank Vogel said. "That's all we talk about with our guys, is that we want to protect our basket. We don't want flagrants, we're trying to protect our basket and protect it in a physical manner."


Foster will be suspended if he accumulates enough flagrant foul points during the playoffs

Sandman21
04-22-2011, 07:07 PM
And they'll be reviewing Boozer's actions when....

oops. sorry. forgot.

IndyHoya
04-22-2011, 07:25 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kPJ89ctsWE

Here's Thomas' "incidental" elbow to Hansborough. Any more "incidental" than Foster's elbow to Deng?

Of course, if an experienced guy like Bennett Salvatore let it go, then it must be non-reviewable and
incidental.

Stryder
04-22-2011, 07:30 PM
I'm not a big fan of being able to retroactively assess flagrants. If they aren't called in the game, let them be...

IndyHoya
04-22-2011, 07:44 PM
I'm not a big fan of being able to retroactively assess flagrants. If they aren't called in the game, let them be...

It's the Bulls, the NBA Eastern darlings. If they're playing the Pacers close, it has to be because the Pacers are dirty. Ergo, dole out the post hoc flagrants. It's the NBA Way!

Marlin
04-22-2011, 07:45 PM
So do we review Thomas' elbow to Hansborough too?
Or Thomas' slap on Danthay Jones' head right after Foster's foul?! Talk about double standard.

This whole review and upgrade to flagrant 1 is such a bull****, are they giving the Bulls excuses for not blowing us out already?

ECKrueger
04-22-2011, 07:52 PM
i agree that it is bull****

idioteque
04-22-2011, 07:57 PM
I wish they'd retroactively rescind Stern's appointment as commissioner while they are going around and changing history.

ChristianDudley
04-22-2011, 07:58 PM
Rridiculous. None of those fouls were intentional. When foster hit Deng's head, it was mostly from Foster getting his lower body taken out from under him. So what does EVERYONE do when that happens? You put your arms down to try to save yourself and he managed to hit Deng on the head. Foul on Rose? It was hard yes and he nearly close-lined him but he went after the ball completely. Now I do think these are kind of worthy for review... but what about all the bulls fouls if they're going to review fosters?

Nothing after Hansbrough gets hit in the TEMPLE by Thomas? That's extremely dangerous. Don't tell me the seriously have never investigated that. Nothing about Boozer throwing that elbow at Hansbrough last game where Hansbrough got called for a foul?

Where are the reviews on those? Why does Foster have to get reviewed and not the placement of camera men? Is this about protecting players, or is this only about protecting the bulls players? Come on now.

I call shenanigans if they seriously never looked into any of those things.

Believe me when I tell you that this league is crooked. Until Stern is gone, good #8-seed teams like ours won't beat overrated #1-teams like we should be doing, especially when there's a superstar player out there making Stern money. LBJ betrayed Stern by joining forces in Miami with Wade & Bosh, and I fully believe Rose is Stern's new toy. He'll do everything that he can to help Rose out in this league in the near future, and unforunately we're the ones enduring the crookism right now.

ChristianDudley
04-22-2011, 07:58 PM
"Oh no not my baby Derrick Rose" - David Stern

Stern has got to go. What a joke.

If only I could THANK this post of yours X1000

DemonHunter1105
04-22-2011, 08:00 PM
I don't think Stern minds Lebron in Miami at all. Him becoming a super villain has generally been seen as the reason NBA ratings have been so high this year.

AesopRockOn
04-22-2011, 08:56 PM
No Balls Association.

Shade
04-22-2011, 09:00 PM
Someone really needs to do an investigation into the league. The bias becomes more blatant with each passing season.

Shade
04-22-2011, 09:02 PM
Oh, and this royally pisses me off:


"I was just trying to go to the basket and create contact."

This is not what fouls were created for. The player initiating the contact should be the one called for the foul, and Rose is admitting that he's seeking to initiate contact.

Eleazar
04-22-2011, 09:23 PM
Oh, and this royally pisses me off:



This is not what fouls were created for. The player initiating the contact should be the one called for the foul, and Rose is admitting that he's seeking to initiate contact.

Exactly, the player who is creating the contact is supposed to pick up the foul, and if that is the offensive player it is either a charge or no foul. That is what I have been complaining about this whole series. Contact doesn't automatically mean there is a foul, and when it is created by the person driving to the basket it is either a foul on him or no foul at all.

IndyHoya
04-22-2011, 09:24 PM
Oh, and this royally pisses me off:



This is not what fouls were created for. The player initiating the contact should be the one called for the foul, and Rose is admitting that he's seeking to initiate contact.

Maybe there would be no need for "hard" fouls if Rose doesn't get to shoot FTs 21 times in one game. But the NBA review of that referee gift isn't open to public scrutiny either.

Cactus Jax
04-22-2011, 09:39 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOKsr4L9lh0

Bring in Manleavy!

Gold
04-22-2011, 09:42 PM
Maybe there would be no need for "hard" fouls if Rose doesn't get to shoot FTs 21 times in one game. But the NBA review of that referee gift isn't open to public scrutiny either.

Weelll.......More like there would be no need for hard fouls if Rose didn't finish so well. lol

joeyd
04-22-2011, 11:15 PM
I really don't want to think of it this way, but this could be Jeff's last game, at least with the Pacers. I hope not, but if it is....then throw those elbows and let's go down fighting!

BlueNGold
04-22-2011, 11:27 PM
I don't really advocate this, but I think the Pacers could make a point by just allowing Rose to make layups the next game. Let him initiate just as much contact as the wussy wants so he can easily lay it in the basket. Isn't that what Stern really wants? Highlight plays by a big market player.

Seriously though, I would establish the Rose Rules if the NBA allowed the players to play like men. For example, the Jordan Rules:

In an interview with Sports Illustrated, Daly described the Jordan Rules as:
If Michael was at the point, we forced him left and doubled him. If he was on the left wing, we went immediately to a double team from the top. If he was on the right wing, we went to a slow double team. He could hurt you equally from either wing—hell, he could hurt you from the hot-dog stand—but we just wanted to vary the look. And if he was on the box, we doubled with a big guy. The other rule was, any time he went by you, you had to nail him. If he was coming off a screen, nail him. We didn't want to be dirty—I know some people thought we were—but we had to make contact and be very physical

joeyd
04-22-2011, 11:30 PM
They just said on the local news that if Jeff had picked up 2 flagrant 1's during the game, then he would have been ejected, but since he wasn't tagged with them during the game, he will not be penalized further by being suspended.

beast23
04-22-2011, 11:32 PM
Oh, and this royally pisses me off:

"I was just trying to go to the basket and create contact."

This is not what fouls were created for. The player initiating the contact should be the one called for the foul, and Rose is admitting that he's seeking to initiate contact.

Totally agree. There is a hell of a lot of difference in going to the basket and DRAWING contact and going to the basket and CREATING contact.

I believe that Rose does the latter at least 50% of the time.

vapacersfan
04-22-2011, 11:41 PM
Surprised no one has come in here to say "the officials are not evil" and "Stern and company and just doing their job"

brichard
04-22-2011, 11:53 PM
I really felt Jeff's fouls really were in the realm of hard NBA foul. I haven't seen all of the fouls from Boozer, so tough to comment. I will tell you though, whether this real or percieved, I do feel the Pacers end up getting the short end of the stick on many of these decisions. I'm not going to call it Small Market or Conspiracy theory, just an honest observation.

During the Pistons/Pacers melee, the disparity in how things were handled still bothers me. One guy shooting more than the entire team? Part of that is a testament to Rose and his driving, but you always have to question that much of a disparity. Were there times when I have felt like the Pacers got preferential treamtent? Sure. But when the league gets involved, can't think of a time where it has seemed to work out equitablly.

Foul on Smits
04-22-2011, 11:54 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOKsr4L9lh0

Bring in Manleavy!

Yep. Time to unleash the Manleavy!

Foul on Smits
04-22-2011, 11:56 PM
I really hope Jeff goes into **** It mode tommorow.

BillS
04-23-2011, 10:33 AM
Surprised no one has come in here to say "the officials are not evil"

Well, the officials on the floor DIDN'T call either foul flagrant, so I'm not sure how the league upgrading the fouls to flagrant reflects on the officials being influenced in this case.

Unclebuck
04-23-2011, 10:45 AM
Well, I think it's been said before that one of the ways an official decides if contact was necessary or not depends on if he feels the defender was trying to get to the ball as opposed to just 'randomly' whacking the guy.


Perhaps it is a factor in the decision. but it is not a get out of jail free card. meaning if Player B killed player A on the court, but since he was going for the ball it is not a flagrant - obviously hyperbole, but makes my point.

Also works the other way if defender does not go for the ball but barely tocuhes the offensive player obviously won't be a flagrant

Unclebuck
04-23-2011, 10:49 AM
I'm not a big fan of being able to retroactively assess flagrants. If they aren't called in the game, let them be...


Oh really? Lets say the reverse happened. They were called flagrants during the game, and because of that jeff was suspendd the next game because he reached the limit. So you don't want the league to review those calls to confirm they were the corect calls. I think not. League reviews every call and every non-call made in every game

IndyHoya
04-23-2011, 10:57 AM
Oh really? Lets say the reverse happened. They were called flagrants during the game, and because of that jeff was suspendd the next game because he reached the limit. So you don't want the league to review those calls to confirm they were the corect calls. I think not. League reviews every call and every non-call made in every game

Who does the reviewing? Stu Jackson personally? Or is there some panel of other refs? Or is it a league Ombudsman? Or the game referees themselves?

What standards do they use? What determines whether a foul is deemed "flagrant" or not? Does the fact that the game refs didn't call the flagrant carry any weight? Does it reflect against the game refs if they missed the "flagrant" call? Will they be fined or demoted for missing the "flagrant" call?

Does the player or team affected have any input in the decision?

Does the injured player or the team affected by the asserted "contact" initiate the review or is the review simply automatic?

Is the review procedure set out in writing somewhere?

If the procedure, reviewers, standards are secret, why is that?

Inquiring minds would like to know.

IndyHoya
04-23-2011, 11:26 AM
Here are the NBA Flagrant Foul Rules

Section IV--Flagrant Foul
a. If contact committed against a player, with or without the ball, is interpreted to be unnecessary, a flagrant foul--penalty (1) will be assessed. A personal foul is charged to the offender and a team foul is charged to the team.

PENALTY: (1) Two free throws shall be attempted and the ball awarded to the offended team on either side of the court at the free throw line extended. (2) If the offended player is injured and unable to attempt his free throws, the opposing coach will select any player from the bench to attempt the free throws. (3) This substitute may not be replaced until the ball is legally touched by a player on the court. (EXCEPTION: Rule 3--Section V--e.) (4) The injured player may not return to the game. (5) A player will be ejected if he commits two flagrant fouls in the same game.

b. If contact committed against a player, with or without the ball, is interpreted to be unnecessary and excessive, a flagrant foul--penalty (2) will be assessed. A personal foul is charged to the offender and a team foul is charged to the team.

PENALTY: (1) Two free throws shall be attempted and the ball awarded to the offended team on either side of the court at the free throw line extended. (2) If the offended player is injured and unable to attempt his free throws, his coach will select a substitute and any player from the team is eligible to attempt the free throws. (3) This substitute may not be replaced until the ball is legally touched by a player on the court. EXCEPTION: Rule 3--Section V--e. (4) The injured player may return to the game at any time after the free throws are attempted. (5) This is an unsportsmanlike act and the offender is ejected.

c. A flagrant foul may be assessed whether the ball is dead or alive.

vapacersfan
04-23-2011, 11:30 AM
Well, the officials on the floor DIDN'T call either foul flagrant, so I'm not sure how the league upgrading the fouls to flagrant reflects on the officials being influenced in this case.

I was commenting more on the big pictures, reviews for Jeff's fouls, but not for any of Boozers elbows, be it to the air or to the head of Foster or McRoberts

IndyHoya
04-23-2011, 11:32 AM
I was commenting more on the big pictures, reviews for Jeff's fouls, but not for any of Boozers elbows, be it to the air or to the head of Foster or McRoberts

Or Boozer's intentional throw-down of Hibbert? Not flagrant? Certainly wasn't "incidental" contact.

IndyHoya
04-23-2011, 11:36 AM
And isn't a potential flagrant reviewable by the game refs on "instant replay"?

If so, the game refs passed up two instances of calling Foster for a flagrant -- i.e., when the incident occurred and when the initial call was reversible after an in game "instant replay" videotape review.