Hoops

Brett Maher's tech vs Perth?

Isaac, I didn't doubt what you said was true, I doubted it was reasonable grounds for a Tech.

Ike,
my point exactly, Mahersey is one of the all time champs of the NBL. Clean, honest and with high integrity. You can't change the past.

But, when a dude like Mahersey gets called for a tech, you know that something smells in the state of Denmark

Let's face it, when Mahersey gets called for the Tech, the umpiring was Sh@thouse!

Isaac, I don't use astrology, numerology, tarot cards, zodiac signs or any form of spiritual beings to come to a conclusion. I use my instinct a lot and believe it or not, it has served me well. I am a firm believer that if something doesn't look right, then its not right.

Not sure whether Ninnis did take it to the NBL or not but if he did, it would be to seek clarity on the situation. That is hardly saying that Ninnis is trained and educated as to what is or isn't a Tech foul. The situation has arisen in the past where a report was made to the NBL and agreed that the ref had been mistaken in his call. The refs are not perfect, its just as likely that they got it wrong as the victims of their call. It wont change the outcome of the game so for what other reason would a report be made other than just seeking clarity and reporting the incidence to the NBL so the ref can be reprimanded. Also how many times do you see it when one ref makes a call only to be overridden by another? It happened only 2 home games ago.

"Adelaide was particularly incensed by a technical foul incurred by captain Brett Maher for a remark to a team-mate.

"We might have to take that call and show it to the NBL this week," Ninnis said.

At the risk of a league fine, the coach could comment no further but it is clear an under-current of unhappiness existed in how the match was officiated"

An experienced player like Brett would have a good idea of what constitutes a Tech and what doesn't. It doesn't seem likely he would knowingly put himself in that position. Its out of character for him to be so reckless when he is the one that brings order to the court. This has been backed up by Ninnis stating that he was going to report it to the NBL. I wasn't at the game but it sounds like many people were quite surprised by the call. I agree that a Tech foul was deserved if Brett spoke to the ref in his face.

Also, if its accurate that Brett said "Don't worry about it, he was calling the same shit in Adelaide." to a team mate, then he was not directly talking to the ref, he was consulting with his own team mate and probably for the purpose of calming him down so his frustration would not have an adverse effect on his game. I see no reason for a Tech.

Isaac, is there anything wrong with being curious about the circumstances leading to Brett's Tech. Considering Brett is a clean sportsmanlike player, I found it interesting to hear what he said or did that resulted in a Tech.

All it says is he made a remark to a team mate. It said nothing about what he said and about who. I know Ninnis can't elaborate for risk of incurring a fine. FM, why be a smart ass and give an example of how you can get a tech by talking to a team mate when you yourself have no idea of what was said. If you read my post immediately before yours, you would see that I was after facts not speculation. You proved who the tosser really is.

EC - There's some information about it, above 216849.

So many arguments from people who think their point is better than anyone else's yet no one can say exactly what Brett did or said to get the Tech. Just stop your insults just for the sake of insulting and come out with the facts if you think you have more credibility than myself. What did Brett say or do? That is all the information I am seeking to determine if it was a valid Tech.

A Tech foul when he is actually speaking to one of his own team mates? Someone please refer me to the page in the rule book that covers this situation. Absurdity at its worst. If anyone believes this was a legitimate Tech, then please spill the beans on the facts of what he actually said or did. No speculation please.

Herka,

Nothing says the defender has to be stationary to get an offensive foul. As long as he establishes legal guarding position initially he is allowed to move laterally and backwards. As long as the contact is on the torso the onus of the contact is then on the offensive player.

The days of a player having to stand still to get a charge went when bill russell played for the Celtics.

Maher foul coun t is always down. When you see a box score with 3 fouls on him you know something's up.

When you see a tech against his name, you know something went amiss.

If people want their home teams game promoted let me know. Here are some of the ones I have done.

Let me know what people think.