I guess Mike Bibby is pretty good after all

**LHayes37** · 02-27-2004, 03:44 AM

Re: I guess Mike Bibby is pretty good after all

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
LHayes37 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
LHayes37 said:
If he got touched at all, and that is an if, it was after the shot was long gone. When the shot is gone it is not a foul. It's amazing none of us were there, but three guys sitting right on the court (I'm not talking about the refs) didn't see a foul and good old Kobe didn't act as if he got fouled.

<hr /></blockquote>

its clear you dont know what ur talking about.

if a player is touched in the act of shooting it is a foul, it was not called

the tnt camera was directly in kobester's face when he mouthed " stevie". steve javie the ref. he then made a swiping motion across his eye...motioning a foul

<hr /></blockquote>

The shot was gone when he got touched. That is not in the act of shooting. We've gotten so used to the refs calling fouls after the shot is released that we believe that it's a foul. The ref called it right, for once. So maybe you should watch it a few thousand more times and you'll see that Christie may have hit him after the shot was away, which is not a foul. But hay, I don't know what I'm talking about because you're clearly the freakin genius here.

<hr /></blockquote>

im not proclaiming genuis...even though i am

im saying the act of shooting is the release of the ball until it has hit the rim or went in

for you to say we get so use to blah blah blah

thats obviously the rule if they are calling them

<hr /></blockquote>

You can say all you want, but that is not the rule. Hell I even saw a game on TV about a week ago when a ref called a foul on a guy well after the shot left the shooters hand and the announcer said that shouldn't have been a foul because the shot was already away. So I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the guy may know a little more about basketaball than me, and dare I say even you. They never called Jordan for taking 53 steps on his way to the basket, does that mean they changed the rule for traveling? Or how about this, when the refs wait to see if a shot falls to decide whether or not they will blow the whistle. We all know it happens, we all know it's bogus, but that doesn't suddenly make it a rule.

**jordan0386** · 02-27-2004, 03:52 AM

Re: I guess Mike Bibby is pretty good after all

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
LHayes37 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
LHayes37 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
LHayes37 said:
If he got touched at all, and that is an if, it was after the shot was long gone. When the shot is gone it is not a foul. It's amazing none of us were there, but three guys sitting right on the court (I'm not talking about the refs) didn't see a foul and good old Kobe didn't act as if he got fouled.

<hr /></blockquote>

its clear you dont know what ur talking about.

if a player is touched in the act of shooting it is a foul, it was not called

the tnt camera was directly in kobester's face when he mouthed " stevie". steve javie the ref. he then made a swiping motion across his eye...motioning a foul

<hr /></blockquote>

The shot was gone when he got touched. That is not in the act of shooting. We've gotten so used to the refs calling fouls after the shot is released that we believe that it's a foul. The ref called it right, for once. So maybe you should watch it a few thousand more times and you'll see that Christie may have hit him after the shot was away, which is not a foul. But hay, I don't know what I'm talking about because you're clearly the freakin genius here.

<hr /></blockquote>

im not proclaiming genuis...even though i am

im saying the act of shooting is the release of the ball until it has hit the rim or went in

for you to say we get so use to blah blah blah

thats obviously the rule if they are calling them

<hr /></blockquote>

You can say all you want, but that is not the rule. Hell I even saw a game on TV about a week ago when a ref called a foul on a guy well after the shot left the shooters hand and the announcer said that shouldn't have been a foul because the shot was already away. So I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the guy may know a little more about basketaball than me, and dare I say even you. They never called Jordan for taking 53 steps on his way to the basket, does that mean they changed the rule for traveling? Or how about this, when the refs wait to see if a shot falls to decide whether or not they will blow the whistle. We all know it happens, we all know it's bogus, but that doesn't suddenly make it a rule.

<hr /></blockquote>

so wat your telling me here is that everytime a guy takes a jumpshot and is hacked on his elbow its not supposed to be called a foul

BUT ITS CALLED ANYWAY

yea bro

**jordan0386** · 02-27-2004, 03:52 AM

Re: I guess Mike Bibby is pretty good after all

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
LHayes37 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
LHayes37 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
LHayes37 said:
If he got touched at all, and that is an if, it was after the shot was long gone. When the shot is gone it is not a foul. It's amazing none of us were there, but three guys sitting right on the court (I'm not talking about the refs) didn't see a foul and good old Kobe didn't act as if he got fouled.

<hr /></blockquote>

its clear you dont know what ur talking about.

if a player is touched in the act of shooting it is a foul, it was not called

the tnt camera was directly in kobester's face when he mouthed " stevie". steve javie the ref. he then made a swiping motion across his eye...motioning a foul

<hr /></blockquote>

The shot was gone when he got touched. That is not in the act of shooting. We've gotten so used to the refs calling fouls after the shot is released that we believe that it's a foul. The ref called it right, for once. So maybe you should watch it a few thousand more times and you'll see that Christie may have hit him after the shot was away, which is not a foul. But hay, I don't know what I'm talking about because you're clearly the freakin genius here.

<hr /></blockquote>

im not proclaiming genuis...even though i am

im saying the act of shooting is the release of the ball until it has hit the rim or went in

for you to say we get so use to blah blah blah

thats obviously the rule if they are calling them

<hr /></blockquote>

You can say all you want, but that is not the rule. Hell I even saw a game on TV about a week ago when a ref called a foul on a guy well after the shot left the shooters hand and the announcer said that shouldn't have been a foul because the shot was already away. So I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the guy may know a little more about basketaball than me, and dare I say even you. They never called Jordan for taking 53 steps on his way to the basket, does that mean they changed the rule for traveling? Or how about this, when the refs wait to see if a shot falls to decide whether or not they will blow the whistle. We all know it happens, we all know it's bogus, but that doesn't suddenly make it a rule.

<hr /></blockquote>

so wat your telling me here is that everytime a guy takes a jumpshot and is hacked on his elbow its not supposed to be called a foul

BUT ITS CALLED ANYWAY

yea bro

**jordan0386** · 02-27-2004, 03:52 AM

Re: I guess Mike Bibby is pretty good after all

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
LHayes37 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
LHayes37 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
LHayes37 said:
If he got touched at all, and that is an if, it was after the shot was long gone. When the shot is gone it is not a foul. It's amazing none of us were there, but three guys sitting right on the court (I'm not talking about the refs) didn't see a foul and good old Kobe didn't act as if he got fouled.

<hr /></blockquote>

its clear you dont know what ur talking about.

if a player is touched in the act of shooting it is a foul, it was not called

the tnt camera was directly in kobester's face when he mouthed " stevie". steve javie the ref. he then made a swiping motion across his eye...motioning a foul

<hr /></blockquote>

The shot was gone when he got touched. That is not in the act of shooting. We've gotten so used to the refs calling fouls after the shot is released that we believe that it's a foul. The ref called it right, for once. So maybe you should watch it a few thousand more times and you'll see that Christie may have hit him after the shot was away, which is not a foul. But hay, I don't know what I'm talking about because you're clearly the freakin genius here.

<hr /></blockquote>

im not proclaiming genuis...even though i am

im saying the act of shooting is the release of the ball until it has hit the rim or went in

for you to say we get so use to blah blah blah

thats obviously the rule if they are calling them

<hr /></blockquote>

You can say all you want, but that is not the rule. Hell I even saw a game on TV about a week ago when a ref called a foul on a guy well after the shot left the shooters hand and the announcer said that shouldn't have been a foul because the shot was already away. So I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the guy may know a little more about basketaball than me, and dare I say even you. They never called Jordan for taking 53 steps on his way to the basket, does that mean they changed the rule for traveling? Or how about this, when the refs wait to see if a shot falls to decide whether or not they will blow the whistle. We all know it happens, we all know it's bogus, but that doesn't suddenly make it a rule.

<hr /></blockquote>

so wat your telling me here is that everytime a guy takes a jumpshot and is hacked on his elbow its not supposed to be called a foul

BUT ITS CALLED ANYWAY

yea bro

**Court_vision** · 02-27-2004, 03:56 AM

Re: I guess Mike Bibby is pretty good after all

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
great win momentum wise for the kings...but they havent proved anything

<hr /></blockquote>

Bottom line is they've beaten LA without Webber, Miller AND Jackson.

That's amazing...and their confidence must be through the roof.

Don't think they haven't proven anything. They know they've been the best team the past two years. Take out the bad calls and they absolutely win it all 2002. Take out Webbers injury and there's no way they don't win 2003.

It's not much different to boxing. Fighters often lose a fight on points, but both boxers know who won . The judges may bad decisions, but deep in their guts both guys know who won.

The Kings know their the best team in basketball.

**Court_vision** · 02-27-2004, 03:56 AM

Re: I guess Mike Bibby is pretty good after all

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
great win momentum wise for the kings...but they havent proved anything

<hr /></blockquote>

Bottom line is they've beaten LA without Webber, Miller AND Jackson.

That's amazing...and their confidence must be through the roof.

Don't think they haven't proven anything. They know they've been the best team the past two years. Take out the bad calls and they absolutely win it all 2002. Take out Webbers injury and there's no way they don't win 2003.

It's not much different to boxing. Fighters often lose a fight on points, but both boxers know who won . The judges may bad decisions, but deep in their guts both guys know who won.

The Kings know their the best team in basketball.

**Court_vision** · 02-27-2004, 03:56 AM

Re: I guess Mike Bibby is pretty good after all

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
great win momentum wise for the kings...but they havent proved anything

<hr /></blockquote>

Bottom line is they've beaten LA without Webber, Miller AND Jackson.

That's amazing...and their confidence must be through the roof.

Don't think they haven't proven anything. They know they've been the best team the past two years. Take out the bad calls and they absolutely win it all 2002. Take out Webbers injury and there's no way they don't win 2003.

It's not much different to boxing. Fighters often lose a fight on points, but both boxers know who won . The judges may bad decisions, but deep in their guts both guys know who won.

The Kings know their the best team in basketball.

**jordan0386** · 02-27-2004, 04:06 AM

Re: I guess Mike Bibby is pretty good after all

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
monkey said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
great win momentum wise for the kings...but they havent proved anything

<hr /></blockquote>

Bottom line is they've beaten LA without Webber, Miller AND Jackson.

That's amazing...and their confidence must be through the roof.

Don't think they haven't proven anything. They know they've been the best team the past two years. Take out the bad calls and they absolutely win it all 2002. Take out Webbers injury and there's no way they don't win 2003.

It's not much different to boxing. Fighters often lose a fight on points, but both boxers know who won . The judges may bad decisions, but deep in their guts both guys know who won.

The Kings know their the best team in basketball.

<hr /></blockquote>

deep down feelings dont count here

playoffs: lakers 3 kings 0

overall kings may be the best team...but no titles...lets move on

**jordan0386** · 02-27-2004, 04:06 AM

Re: I guess Mike Bibby is pretty good after all

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
monkey said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
great win momentum wise for the kings...but they havent proved anything

<hr /></blockquote>

Bottom line is they've beaten LA without Webber, Miller AND Jackson.

That's amazing...and their confidence must be through the roof.

Don't think they haven't proven anything. They know they've been the best team the past two years. Take out the bad calls and they absolutely win it all 2002. Take out Webbers injury and there's no way they don't win 2003.

It's not much different to boxing. Fighters often lose a fight on points, but both boxers know who won . The judges may bad decisions, but deep in their guts both guys know who won.

The Kings know their the best team in basketball.

<hr /></blockquote>

deep down feelings dont count here

playoffs: lakers 3 kings 0

overall kings may be the best team...but no titles...lets move on

**jordan0386** · 02-27-2004, 04:06 AM

Re: I guess Mike Bibby is pretty good after all

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
monkey said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
great win momentum wise for the kings...but they havent proved anything

<hr /></blockquote>

Bottom line is they've beaten LA without Webber, Miller AND Jackson.

That's amazing...and their confidence must be through the roof.

Don't think they haven't proven anything. They know they've been the best team the past two years. Take out the bad calls and they absolutely win it all 2002. Take out Webbers injury and there's no way they don't win 2003.

It's not much different to boxing. Fighters often lose a fight on points, but both boxers know who won . The judges may bad decisions, but deep in their guts both guys know who won.

The Kings know their the best team in basketball.

<hr /></blockquote>

deep down feelings dont count here

playoffs: lakers 3 kings 0

overall kings may be the best team...but no titles...lets move on

**LHayes37** · 02-27-2004, 04:06 AM

Re: I guess Mike Bibby is pretty good after all

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
LHayes37 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
LHayes37 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
LHayes37 said:
If he got touched at all, and that is an if, it was after the shot was long gone. When the shot is gone it is not a foul. It's amazing none of us were there, but three guys sitting right on the court (I'm not talking about the refs) didn't see a foul and good old Kobe didn't act as if he got fouled.

<hr /></blockquote>

its clear you dont know what ur talking about.

if a player is touched in the act of shooting it is a foul, it was not called

the tnt camera was directly in kobester's face when he mouthed " stevie". steve javie the ref. he then made a swiping motion across his eye...motioning a foul

<hr /></blockquote>

The shot was gone when he got touched. That is not in the act of shooting. We've gotten so used to the refs calling fouls after the shot is released that we believe that it's a foul. The ref called it right, for once. So maybe you should watch it a few thousand more times and you'll see that Christie may have hit him after the shot was away, which is not a foul. But hay, I don't know what I'm talking about because you're clearly the freakin genius here.

<hr /></blockquote>

im not proclaiming genuis...even though i am

im saying the act of shooting is the release of the ball until it has hit the rim or went in

for you to say we get so use to blah blah blah

thats obviously the rule if they are calling them

<hr /></blockquote>

You can say all you want, but that is not the rule. Hell I even saw a game on TV about a week ago when a ref called a foul on a guy well after the shot left the shooters hand and the announcer said that shouldn't have been a foul because the shot was already away. So I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the guy may know a little more about basketaball than me, and dare I say even you. They never called Jordan for taking 53 steps on his way to the basket, does that mean they changed the rule for traveling? Or how about this, when the refs wait to see if a shot falls to decide whether or not they will blow the whistle. We all know it happens, we all know it's bogus, but that doesn't suddenly make it a rule.

<hr /></blockquote>

so wat your telling me here is that everytime a guy takes a jumpshot and is hacked on his elbow its not supposed to be called a foul

BUT ITS CALLED ANYWAY

yea bro

<hr /></blockquote>

You just don't get it and you won't get it. But wait, I just remembered something. Why wasn't Payton called for a foul when he hit Bibby's hand after he let go of that three late in the fourth quarter? I know, because it wasn't a foul, the ball was gone. By the way, the Lakers should have dropped the hammer on the Kings tonight, the game shouldn't have even been close with the Kings missing three of their top six players.

**LHayes37** · 02-27-2004, 04:06 AM

Re: I guess Mike Bibby is pretty good after all

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
LHayes37 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
LHayes37 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
LHayes37 said:
If he got touched at all, and that is an if, it was after the shot was long gone. When the shot is gone it is not a foul. It's amazing none of us were there, but three guys sitting right on the court (I'm not talking about the refs) didn't see a foul and good old Kobe didn't act as if he got fouled.

<hr /></blockquote>

its clear you dont know what ur talking about.

if a player is touched in the act of shooting it is a foul, it was not called

the tnt camera was directly in kobester's face when he mouthed " stevie". steve javie the ref. he then made a swiping motion across his eye...motioning a foul

<hr /></blockquote>

The shot was gone when he got touched. That is not in the act of shooting. We've gotten so used to the refs calling fouls after the shot is released that we believe that it's a foul. The ref called it right, for once. So maybe you should watch it a few thousand more times and you'll see that Christie may have hit him after the shot was away, which is not a foul. But hay, I don't know what I'm talking about because you're clearly the freakin genius here.

<hr /></blockquote>

im not proclaiming genuis...even though i am

im saying the act of shooting is the release of the ball until it has hit the rim or went in

for you to say we get so use to blah blah blah

thats obviously the rule if they are calling them

<hr /></blockquote>

You can say all you want, but that is not the rule. Hell I even saw a game on TV about a week ago when a ref called a foul on a guy well after the shot left the shooters hand and the announcer said that shouldn't have been a foul because the shot was already away. So I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the guy may know a little more about basketaball than me, and dare I say even you. They never called Jordan for taking 53 steps on his way to the basket, does that mean they changed the rule for traveling? Or how about this, when the refs wait to see if a shot falls to decide whether or not they will blow the whistle. We all know it happens, we all know it's bogus, but that doesn't suddenly make it a rule.

<hr /></blockquote>

so wat your telling me here is that everytime a guy takes a jumpshot and is hacked on his elbow its not supposed to be called a foul

BUT ITS CALLED ANYWAY

yea bro

<hr /></blockquote>

You just don't get it and you won't get it. But wait, I just remembered something. Why wasn't Payton called for a foul when he hit Bibby's hand after he let go of that three late in the fourth quarter? I know, because it wasn't a foul, the ball was gone. By the way, the Lakers should have dropped the hammer on the Kings tonight, the game shouldn't have even been close with the Kings missing three of their top six players.

**LHayes37** · 02-27-2004, 04:06 AM

Re: I guess Mike Bibby is pretty good after all

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
LHayes37 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
LHayes37 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
LHayes37 said:
If he got touched at all, and that is an if, it was after the shot was long gone. When the shot is gone it is not a foul. It's amazing none of us were there, but three guys sitting right on the court (I'm not talking about the refs) didn't see a foul and good old Kobe didn't act as if he got fouled.

<hr /></blockquote>

its clear you dont know what ur talking about.

if a player is touched in the act of shooting it is a foul, it was not called

the tnt camera was directly in kobester's face when he mouthed " stevie". steve javie the ref. he then made a swiping motion across his eye...motioning a foul

<hr /></blockquote>

The shot was gone when he got touched. That is not in the act of shooting. We've gotten so used to the refs calling fouls after the shot is released that we believe that it's a foul. The ref called it right, for once. So maybe you should watch it a few thousand more times and you'll see that Christie may have hit him after the shot was away, which is not a foul. But hay, I don't know what I'm talking about because you're clearly the freakin genius here.

<hr /></blockquote>

im not proclaiming genuis...even though i am

im saying the act of shooting is the release of the ball until it has hit the rim or went in

for you to say we get so use to blah blah blah

thats obviously the rule if they are calling them

<hr /></blockquote>

You can say all you want, but that is not the rule. Hell I even saw a game on TV about a week ago when a ref called a foul on a guy well after the shot left the shooters hand and the announcer said that shouldn't have been a foul because the shot was already away. So I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the guy may know a little more about basketaball than me, and dare I say even you. They never called Jordan for taking 53 steps on his way to the basket, does that mean they changed the rule for traveling? Or how about this, when the refs wait to see if a shot falls to decide whether or not they will blow the whistle. We all know it happens, we all know it's bogus, but that doesn't suddenly make it a rule.

<hr /></blockquote>

so wat your telling me here is that everytime a guy takes a jumpshot and is hacked on his elbow its not supposed to be called a foul

BUT ITS CALLED ANYWAY

yea bro

<hr /></blockquote>

You just don't get it and you won't get it. But wait, I just remembered something. Why wasn't Payton called for a foul when he hit Bibby's hand after he let go of that three late in the fourth quarter? I know, because it wasn't a foul, the ball was gone. By the way, the Lakers should have dropped the hammer on the Kings tonight, the game shouldn't have even been close with the Kings missing three of their top six players.

**jordan0386** · 02-27-2004, 04:08 AM

Re: I guess Mike Bibby is pretty good after all

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
LHayes37 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
LHayes37 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
LHayes37 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
LHayes37 said:
If he got touched at all, and that is an if, it was after the shot was long gone. When the shot is gone it is not a foul. It's amazing none of us were there, but three guys sitting right on the court (I'm not talking about the refs) didn't see a foul and good old Kobe didn't act as if he got fouled.

<hr /></blockquote>

its clear you dont know what ur talking about.

if a player is touched in the act of shooting it is a foul, it was not called

the tnt camera was directly in kobester's face when he mouthed " stevie". steve javie the ref. he then made a swiping motion across his eye...motioning a foul

<hr /></blockquote>

The shot was gone when he got touched. That is not in the act of shooting. We've gotten so used to the refs calling fouls after the shot is released that we believe that it's a foul. The ref called it right, for once. So maybe you should watch it a few thousand more times and you'll see that Christie may have hit him after the shot was away, which is not a foul. But hay, I don't know what I'm talking about because you're clearly the freakin genius here.

<hr /></blockquote>

im not proclaiming genuis...even though i am

im saying the act of shooting is the release of the ball until it has hit the rim or went in

for you to say we get so use to blah blah blah

thats obviously the rule if they are calling them

<hr /></blockquote>

You can say all you want, but that is not the rule. Hell I even saw a game on TV about a week ago when a ref called a foul on a guy well after the shot left the shooters hand and the announcer said that shouldn't have been a foul because the shot was already away. So I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the guy may know a little more about basketaball than me, and dare I say even you. They never called Jordan for taking 53 steps on his way to the basket, does that mean they changed the rule for traveling? Or how about this, when the refs wait to see if a shot falls to decide whether or not they will blow the whistle. We all know it happens, we all know it's bogus, but that doesn't suddenly make it a rule.

<hr /></blockquote>

so wat your telling me here is that everytime a guy takes a jumpshot and is hacked on his elbow its not supposed to be called a foul

BUT ITS CALLED ANYWAY

yea bro

<hr /></blockquote>

You just don't get it and you won't get it. But wait, I just remembered something. Why wasn't Payton called for a foul when he hit Bibby's hand after he let go of that three late in the fourth quarter? I know, because it wasn't a foul, the ball was gone. By the way, the Lakers should have dropped the hammer on the Kings tonight, the game shouldn't have even been close with the Kings missing three of their top six players.

<hr /></blockquote>

but you basically proved my point correctly...the refs dont make nik nak calls like that late in a big game...i dont know what point your trying to make...lets move on

**jordan0386** · 02-27-2004, 04:08 AM

Re: I guess Mike Bibby is pretty good after all

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
LHayes37 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
LHayes37 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
LHayes37 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
jordan0386 said:
<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
LHayes37 said:
If he got touched at all, and that is an if, it was after the shot was long gone. When the shot is gone it is not a foul. It's amazing none of us were there, but three guys sitting right on the court (I'm not talking about the refs) didn't see a foul and good old Kobe didn't act as if he got fouled.

<hr /></blockquote>

its clear you dont know what ur talking about.

if a player is touched in the act of shooting it is a foul, it was not called

the tnt camera was directly in kobester's face when he mouthed " stevie". steve javie the ref. he then made a swiping motion across his eye...motioning a foul

<hr /></blockquote>

The shot was gone when he got touched. That is not in the act of shooting. We've gotten so used to the refs calling fouls after the shot is released that we believe that it's a foul. The ref called it right, for once. So maybe you should watch it a few thousand more times and you'll see that Christie may have hit him after the shot was away, which is not a foul. But hay, I don't know what I'm talking about because you're clearly the freakin genius here.

<hr /></blockquote>

im not proclaiming genuis...even though i am

im saying the act of shooting is the release of the ball until it has hit the rim or went in

for you to say we get so use to blah blah blah

thats obviously the rule if they are calling them

<hr /></blockquote>

You can say all you want, but that is not the rule. Hell I even saw a game on TV about a week ago when a ref called a foul on a guy well after the shot left the shooters hand and the announcer said that shouldn't have been a foul because the shot was already away. So I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the guy may know a little more about basketaball than me, and dare I say even you. They never called Jordan for taking 53 steps on his way to the basket, does that mean they changed the rule for traveling? Or how about this, when the refs wait to see if a shot falls to decide whether or not they will blow the whistle. We all know it happens, we all know it's bogus, but that doesn't suddenly make it a rule.

<hr /></blockquote>

so wat your telling me here is that everytime a guy takes a jumpshot and is hacked on his elbow its not supposed to be called a foul

BUT ITS CALLED ANYWAY

yea bro

<hr /></blockquote>

You just don't get it and you won't get it. But wait, I just remembered something. Why wasn't Payton called for a foul when he hit Bibby's hand after he let go of that three late in the fourth quarter? I know, because it wasn't a foul, the ball was gone. By the way, the Lakers should have dropped the hammer on the Kings tonight, the game shouldn't have even been close with the Kings missing three of their top six players.

<hr /></blockquote>

but you basically proved my point correctly...the refs dont make nik nak calls like that late in a big game...i dont know what point your trying to make...lets move on

I guess Mike Bibby is pretty good after all

Recommended Videos

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment