Hoops

Start a new topic

Choose the category that best suits your topic.

Check this if your topic contains a game spoiler (e.g., an NBA game that might be televised later).

Check this if your topic is spam.

You must read the Terms of Use. Please do not post offensive material.
Learn how to embed YouTube videos or tweets

array(2) { [0]=> string(815) " select r.*, rc.info, t.title as threadtitle, u.username as username, u.anonymous as useranonymous, `f`.`value` AS `flairvalue`, `ft`.`name` AS `flairname`, `ft`.`colour` AS `flaircolour`, `ft`.`icon` AS `flairicon` from reply as r join thread as t on t.id = r.threadid join replycontent as rc on rc.replyid = r.id join user as u on u.id = r.userid left join `flair` `f` on `f`.`userid` = `u`.`id` and `f`.`categoryid` = `t`.`categoryid` left join `flairoption` `ft` on `ft`.`id` = `f`.`flairoptionid` where r.businessid = :businessId and r.threadid = :threadId group by r.id order by r.utcdated desc limit 0,50 " [1]=> array(2) { ["businessId"]=> int(1) ["threadId"]=> int(44498) } }

koberulz

Years ago

Did Norton deserve to be ejected?

100% yes. First foul was clear interpretation of the USF rule, and got called for holding while the ball wasn't in play. Easy call.

That rule only applies in the final two minutes. It was for a jersey grab.

Reply #724011 Report this topic

Isaac

Years ago

Another salty Perth fan? This thread is a joke.

I thought it was actually a pretty reasonable discussion for the most part until you came in with that. OP asked in a fair way, and any counterpoints were made politely enough.

Reply #723986 Report this topic

Anonymous

Years ago

The refs didn’t need to judge whether or not to eject Norton.

All they should be judging is the individual call. Ideally, they wouldn’t remember which player/s have already been called for usf or T.

Whether or not each call should have been made, that’s the important issue, and each call should be assessed on its merits, in isolation from the other call.

Reply #723982 Report this topic

Anonymous

Years ago

‘they would rather err on the side of ignoring it, which is exactly what they should do’

Agreed, but I’m still not sure how they were supposedly frustrated by all this flopping that was going on.

Reply #723950 Report this topic

Anonymous

Years ago

‘the play of wagstaff embellishing a call throwing himself back,’

Which was a charge anyway. Patterson barreled into wagstaff’s chest so its pretty irrelevant that he sold the contact.

All I am saying is if the refs witnessed multiple flops between the warning and Norton’s call, why wait so long before blowing the whistle again? I don’t think any NBL ref would give a warning for a tech, then let the same behavior go for a few more plays.

Reply #723948 Report this topic

Luuuc

Years ago

But if those other flops were flops, why didn't they call them?

Just guessing here, but I'd expect that a ref would want to be very sure it was a flop before calling it that way, so if they didn't have a great view of what happened they would rather err on the side of ignoring it, which is exactly what they should do.

(This is why I don't really like having flopping as another thing the refs need to be looking at. We already ask a lot of them and are quick to have a sook when they don't get something right. Now let's put something else on their plate that also requires them to judge a player's intent)

Reply #723946 Report this topic

Anonymous

Years ago

But if those other flops were flops, why didn’t they call them? Why did it take norton falling over for them to blow the whistle? You’re not making any sense.

Reply #723940 Report this topic

Luuuc

Years ago

It certainly had the desired effect on the number of players hitting the deck.
I still don't think it's a great idea for refs to have to judge on the spot whether something was a flop or not, because we've seen in the past that it can go horribly wrong, and I'd hate to see someone ejected for tripping over their own foot.
But I don't really have an issue with last night.
I bet the lesson gets learned pretty quickly throughout the league after that.

Overall I think the lowering of tolerance of unsportsmanlike acts is good for the game. (I think that cheap fouls on a shooter after a whistle should be added to the list of things we stamp out. Hacking someone's arm is clearly not a legit basketball play either.)

Reply #723939 Report this topic

Anonymous

Years ago

Stop saying the refs were sick of several flops. They got the warning for one, then ejected a guy for another. If the refs were sick of the other flops then those would have also been whistled the same way.

Or maybe they weren’t flops.

Reply #723929 Report this topic

Anonymous

Years ago

‘Second one was a tech where the refs had had enough of about 5 Wildcat flops’

How many flops warnings had they received? Just one...

Reply #723921 Report this topic

Anonymous

Years ago

First foul was USF wasn’t it?

Reply #723914 Report this topic

Start a new topic

Did Norton deserve to be ejected?

Reply to this topic

Recent Posts