Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

    Originally posted by Foul on Smits View Post
    I cant tell with the shot, but I turned this game on with 5 minutes to go and saw at 3 atrocious calls go against the Pacers and about 2 no calls that should have been called. I was furious. I think they took David West out of the game mentally. I think that's why he made such a boneheaded pass at the end there.
    Two words: Bennett. Salvatore.
    "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

    "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

      He got it off.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

        That's about as close as a call as you could get. So it all comes down to what was ruled on the court; if they had initially ruled no basket, I'm certain it would've stood as called as well.

        The NBA won't be issuing any apology because one isn't necessary.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

          Originally posted by TMJ31 View Post
          Unfortunately, the referees made the cowardly decision that the call was just TOO close, and "aw heck, just let them play 5 more minutes." Some people agree that perhaps that was the "right" way to officiate in that situation. I disagree completely. The NBA rulebook says that if time expires and a player has not fully released the ball at that precise moment, the shot is disallowed. In this situation, NOT enforcing that rule directly lead to the Pacers not instantly claiming a win, and instead the events of overtime took place and we lost.

          Had that rule been enforced by the officials last night, things would have ended OFFICIALLY the way that they should have.

          Pacers 90
          Raptors 88
          The rulebook also says "Clear and conclusive visual evidence needed to overturn original call by officials."

          The officials don't have the time or ability to freeze frame the shot from 4 different angles. And even if they did, you still have to squint your eyes to see what you want to see.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

            I am in the camp that the ball was released from Johnson's hand by the time the backboard light came on.

            But, if we can honestly sit here and look at these photos and see different things, that just tells you how close the call was to begin with. And as such, once the call was made on the floor, can everyone agree that without an additional review being conclusive one way or the other (as evidenced by our differing opinions), it is not likely at all that the officials were going to overrule the original call?

            It would have been great if the call were overturned. But I honestly cannot argue it one way or the other. The real shame in this happening is that it was totally avoidable had we simply used our smarts and taken better care of the basketball. So, any way you choose to look at it, the onus is on us.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

              Sitting on opposite baseline press row, we all thought it was good in real time. Then, when they showed the baseline angle on the big board directly above us, you could see Amir had his left hand off the ball (to the side, which why it looks like it is touching it from the side angle) and that he had released the ball with his right. It was an odd motion...somewhere between a tip and a shot...because during slo-mo replay, it looked like it would be no way he wouldn't be touching it, but then he wasn't, and then the red lights came on.

              The shot was out of his hand in time, and the call was right, both in real time and on the replay.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

                Yeah I was at the game, it really looked good. I said it was good before seeing any replays and then stood behind that thought when I did see replays.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

                  It was crystal clear at the BiLF that the shot was good. The person who robbed the Pacers of a victory was David West. I love West and he had a great overall game, but that was an epic mistake with a timeout left.

                  I appreciate and applaud your efforts, however.
                  The Miller Time Podcast on 8 Points, 9 Seconds:
                  http://www.eightpointsnineseconds.com/tag/miller-time-podcast/
                  RSS Feed
                  Subscribe via iTunes

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

                    I just don't see it. Sorry, man. Tough call that was called correctly.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

                      Originally posted by BillS View Post
                      Serious question - is the rule that the shooting motion portion of the hand must have released or is it that no portion of the hand may be touching? I ask because it is almost always stated in terms of whether or not the ball was released, and this analysis seems to turn on a couple of fingers still touching after the motion was completed but the light had not come on - and that last is important, it is the light and not the clock digits that matters.
                      The rule, and my position when showing these photos, was that once the clock reaches 0.0 and the red lights illuminate, if even ONE teeny-tiny portion of a finger, hand, thumb, whatever is touching the ball for any reason the game is OVER and the shot is disallowed. It's not like in football where you can finish the final play if time expires (Not insinuating you thought that, but it's just an example)

                      Originally posted by MnvrChvy View Post
                      I'm not mad about this call. To me, it came down to what they called at the time of the play because the replays were not 100% convincing. In this kind of situation, I think it's better for the refs to assume the play was good and then to challenge that ruling. Benefit of the doubt should go to the offense.
                      I can totally respect your opinion here, but I completely disagree. Why? Because in this day and age we DO have replay available. If a shot is honestly THIS close, then yes, the refs should be looking at it from 4 different angles for as long as it takes to make the correct call. Which they did not do last night. As a result, the Pacers did not immediately get a "W" and instead we had to deal with an overtime, and it just wasn't our night. But all that would have been avoided had they not given them the "benefit of the doubt." That is why I was so upset about this.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

                        Well, I appreciate everyone reading and taking the time to comment on this thread, whether you agree or disagree.

                        I for one will be going to my grave with this game 90-88 in favor of the Blue and Gold. I simply cannot look at this pictures, especially the 3rd angle, and feel any other way.

                        It was somewhat cathartic for me taking the time last night to write this and get all the screenshots. At least I had the chance to vent, which for a fan who had to endure the Packers Vs Seahawks debacle, as well as several bad endings to Pacers games this year, was most needed!

                        For all of you who were at BLF, I respect and appreciate your input. I have no doubt that seeing the shot on the new scoreboard would indeed be helpful. But I don't need that board to be able to see something right in front of my eyes, with all due respect. Although the screenshots I took of this shot were fairly low resolution, that was out of pure lack of availability of anything higher on my computer. While watching the actual game I was seeing it all play out in 1080P on a large plasma television from a couple feet away. It was clear as crystal. I felt then, just as I feel now. Pacers 90 Raptors 88.

                        But again, this thread was meant to be a place to vent about our continued 'bad luck' with end game officiating. It is what it is, I suppose. We'll hopefully learn from this game and be a stronger team for it. I can assure you, David West and some of the other players who made bad decisions down the stretch will not be doing that again any time soon after this one.

                        And at the end of the day, maybe that's what we needed?

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Phree Refill View Post
                          I would like to see a reply of Toronto's steal of David west's inbounds pass. From the one or two times I've seen it in real time it looked like it was very very close to being a back court violation on Toronto.
                          Don't 100% quote me on this but I am pretty damn sure that if your momentum is carrying you into the backcourt it is not over and back.
                          There is no NBA player named Monte Ellis.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Also, thank you TMJ for actually doing this like I asked you to. Most people wouldn't follow through on that kind of thing because it is time consuming.
                            There is no NBA player named Monte Ellis.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

                              Originally posted by boombaby1987 View Post
                              Also, thank you TMJ for actually doing this like I asked you to. Most people wouldn't follow through on that kind of thing because it is time consuming.
                              You're welcome.

                              Like I said earlier, it was a cathartic for me. I've been so frustrated by the frequency of these occurrences this year in sports. Felt good to express that.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

                                For the record, the HS game I was broadcasting today had a somewhat similar situation. Kid CLEARLY released the ball in time (it was incredibly obvious), refs waved it off, head coach got T'ed up arguing the clearly blown call, and all I was thinking was "Man I wish we had these refs last night..." LOL
                                "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

                                "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X