sactown_draftpick
G-League
This is why after that series i always believed the nba should put in a challenge system......like the nfl has.....this would take the game out of the refs hands
NOTE: I split this away from the Donaghy thread as I think it deserves its own thread.
Personally, I think the league MUST do something at this point to at least appear as though they're serious about the integrity of the game and the officiating. While challenges present a separate set of problems, I think they could be dealt with in a manner that would be acceptable.
NOTE: I split this away from the Donaghy thread as I think it deserves its own thread.
Personally, I think the league MUST do something at this point to at least appear as though they're serious about the integrity of the game and the officiating. While challenges present a separate set of problems, I think they could be dealt with in a manner that would be acceptable.
Yes we did. You just didn't like (or didn't see) the solution.And we've had this same thread before (and I really doubt anything new wil come of this), and never have addressed how disastrous it would be to the flow of a flow game to suddenly call a halt to the action and wait for two minutes while the officials go over to huddle on the sidelines.
NFL and NBA are two different beasties, and the even the NFL is not nutty enough to have challenges for things like fouls. You can't challenge pass interference for instance -- its too much of a judgement call. Same thing with the great majority of the problem calls in Game 6. All you could rationally try to challenge in basketball would be in/out of bounds, foot on line for threes, did the clock run out, and that kind of thing. And we've had this same thread before (and I really doubt anything new wil come of this), and never have addressed how disastrous it would be to the flow of a flow game to suddenly call a halt to the action and wait for two minutes while the officials go over to huddle on the sidelines. You can do that in a stop start game if you want. In football, baseball, in tennis maybe. Not in flow games like soccer or basketball without artificially chopping the hell out of the game.
Nor, it should be obviouosly noted, would a challenge system be likely to have much effect if indeed the issue is biased refs. If you truly think there was a conspiracy, well what do you think happens whenh the conspiring ref goes over to rule on the challenge?
NFL and NBA are two different beasties, and the even the NFL is not nutty enough to have challenges for things like fouls. You can't challenge pass interference for instance -- its too much of a judgement call. Same thing with the great majority of the problem calls in Game 6. All you could rationally try to challenge in basketball would be in/out of bounds, foot on line for threes, did the clock run out, and that kind of thing. And we've had this same thread before (and I really doubt anything new wil come of this), and never have addressed how disastrous it would be to the flow of a flow game to suddenly call a halt to the action and wait for two minutes while the officials go over to huddle on the sidelines. You can do that in a stop start game if you want. In football, baseball, in tennis maybe. Not in flow games like soccer or basketball without artificially chopping the hell out of the game.
Nor, it should be obviouosly noted, would a challenge system be likely to have much effect if indeed the issue is biased refs. If you truly think there was a conspiracy, well what do you think happens whenh the conspiring ref goes over to rule on the challenge?
Gotta disagree here. If the games aren't close, then chances are nobody will even use challenges. And in tight games, it seems teams are calling timeouts all the time anyway, so what's the difference between stopping the game for a timeout, and stopping to review a play? I actually think this could give teams momentum, probably when they need it most
You only stop a play on a timeout on your own possession.
A challenge system, by its very nature, would involve stopping play whenver/wherever a bad call was made, or in the laternative, stopping it on your own possession, and then going back and changing something that had already happened earlier and having to replay from that point. Neither is sensical, nor so far as I know has ANY league in ANY continuous play sport EVER instituted such a ridiculous device. Its just not that big of a deal, and if the games are reffed properly in the first place, the bad calls more or less balance. Only in the case of biad are they likely to pile up and become decisive against one team, and if you have such a bias involved, you aren't going to stop it with challenges, nor is there any rational way you could give a coach on the wrong end of a fix enough challenges to matter. What, is Rick going to get to stop the game a dozen times in the 4th quarter of game 6?
The answer does not lie in screwing up the very flow of the game that makes basketball attractive just to get the occasional call corrected. It lies at a higher level of referee oversight and control.