2022-23 Around the NBA Thread

Phrazbit

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 10, 2011
Posts
19,808
Reaction score
10,675
xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

This would be great, but they would have to stick to it. They tried to review bad flops after games and retroactively give technicals a while back, but it seems like within a few months the league forgot their own policy.
 

Hoop Head

ASFN Icon
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Posts
16,289
Reaction score
11,311
Location
Tempe, AZ
xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

This would be great, but they would have to stick to it. They tried to review bad flops after games and retroactively give technicals a while back, but it seems like within a few months the league forgot their own policy.

Summer League isn't a good place to try it. Those kids play hard and there is little to no flopping. Definitely for the rule change but would like to see it adopted elsewhere like preseason first.
 

Phrazbit

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 10, 2011
Posts
19,808
Reaction score
10,675
Summer League isn't a good place to try it. Those kids play hard and there is little to no flopping. Definitely for the rule change but would like to see it adopted elsewhere like preseason first.

I agree. I doubt it will have much impact on the play style of the summer league but I suppose they could gauge how disruptive the review processes is for giving a T.

I am for reviews but they are often maddeningly slow. I feel like if they can't decide within a minute then they should leave the call as is. The same should be for reviewing a potential "flop t". If they can't decide rather quickly, then leave it be but a TON of flops are maddeningly obvious at first glance, if they could cut back on those alone it would be huge.
 

Yuma

Suns are my Kryptonite!
Joined
Jan 3, 2003
Posts
20,871
Reaction score
10,319
Location
Laveen, AZ
I agree. I doubt it will have much impact on the play style of the summer league but I suppose they could gauge how disruptive the review processes is for giving a T.

I am for reviews but they are often maddeningly slow. I feel like if they can't decide within a minute then they should leave the call as is. The same should be for reviewing a potential "flop t". If they can't decide rather quickly, then leave it be but a TON of flops are maddeningly obvious at first glance, if they could cut back on those alone it would be huge.
I think in general, too many reviews are had in games. In the old days, refs didn't have use of this technology. It was funny, on replays, I would say most of the time the refs were right. Surprisingly so. Were there the occasional blown calls, yes. But the game moved at a better pace, and players stayed focused and in the groove better. Sometimes at the end of games now, it's maddeningly slow. White, review, stand around 5 minutes. Net play, whistle, review, stand around five minutes.
 

JCSunsfan

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 24, 2002
Posts
21,760
Reaction score
6,152
xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media

This would be great, but they would have to stick to it. They tried to review bad flops after games and retroactively give technicals a while back, but it seems like within a few months the league forgot their own policy.
Good grief. You think people complain about the charging/blocking call? Wait til this one goes into effect. This is another way for referees to control the outcome on judgment. It is too hard in the flow of the game to decide whether it was a fall or a flop.

That should be determined afterward and fines levied. Let the game flow.
 
Top