Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops

Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/index.php)
-   NBA Forum (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   wasnt that foul on jefferson at the end a clear path? (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=298964)

inclinerator 05-07-2013 01:32 AM

wasnt that foul on jefferson at the end a clear path?
 
does it not count as a clear path if he's already taking off for the dunk?

coin24 05-07-2013 01:34 AM

Re: wasnt that foul on jefferson at the end a clear path?
 
He should have went up stronger... I guess he felt the contact from behind and resumed usual position, push back:oldlol:

LT Ice Cream 05-07-2013 01:39 AM

Re: wasnt that foul on jefferson at the end a clear path?
 
Yeah it was. Didn't think of that. What's the penalty for a clear path foul?

inclinerator 05-07-2013 01:42 AM

Re: wasnt that foul on jefferson at the end a clear path?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by LT Ice Cream
Yeah it was. Didn't think of that. What's the penalty for a clear path foul?

2 shots and the ball

AboutBuckets 05-07-2013 02:12 PM

Re: wasnt that foul on jefferson at the end a clear path?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by inclinerator
does it not count as a clear path if he's already taking off for the dunk?


The clear path rule was made so that a 'regular' non-shooting foul on a fast break wouldn't just create a stoppage of play and inbound. If the ball carrier is already in a shooting motion, it can only be a shooting foul (or a flagrant but you know what I mean).

Xsatyr 05-07-2013 05:09 PM

Re: wasnt that foul on jefferson at the end a clear path?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by inclinerator
does it not count as a clear path if he's already taking off for the dunk?

I heard in a Rockets game that if you're fouled after passing the free throw line then it is not a clear path. They could be wrong, not always the brightest bunch.

Rake2204 05-07-2013 05:17 PM

Re: wasnt that foul on jefferson at the end a clear path?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by AboutBuckets
The clear path rule was made so that a 'regular' non-shooting foul on a fast break wouldn't just create a stoppage of play and inbound. If the ball carrier is already in a shooting motion, it can only be a shooting foul (or a flagrant but you know what I mean).

Righto. The essence of the rule is to discourage someone from immediately and intentionally grabbing a player before he has any opportunity to get into the open floor.

I kind of feel it was the NBA's way of preventing players from stopping showtime plays or at least advantageous ones without those defenders having to commit any sort of energy or skill. Chase him down and stop the dunk? Sure. Turn the ball over but then just stand and grab him right as he hits half court? Not so much.

InfiniteBaskets 05-07-2013 05:22 PM

Re: wasnt that foul on jefferson at the end a clear path?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Rake2204
Righto. The essence of the rule is to discourage someone from immediately and intentionally grabbing a player before he has any opportunity to get into the open floor.

I kind of feel it was the NBA's way of preventing players from stopping showtime plays or at least advantageous ones without those defenders having to commit any sort of energy or skill. Chase him down and stop the dunk? Sure. Turn the ball over but then just stand and grab him right as he hits half court? Not so much.


Except it also gives incentives for fouling a player in the air from behind as opposed to fouling a player from behind while he's dribbling on the ground.

It almost encourages players to make the more dangerous play anytime a defender has the ability to run with the guy on the fastbreak.

Rake2204 05-07-2013 05:31 PM

Re: wasnt that foul on jefferson at the end a clear path?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by InfiniteBaskets
Except it also gives incentives for fouling a player in the air from behind as opposed to fouling a player from behind while he's dribbling on the ground.

It almost encourages players to make the more dangerous play anytime a defender has the ability to run with the guy on the fastbreak.

Well, there is a safe way to foul a player from behind. In fact, there's a ton of safe ways to do so. In 99% of chasedown situations, defensive players know what play they can make and whether it's going to be safe. They're also very aware of what constitutes a flagrant foul.

And while flagrant fouls occur (and sometimes on accident), they're actually very rare in comparison to non-flagrant chasedown plays or opportunities and likely minuscule when attempting to attribute a dangerous play on a player's reluctance to foul a player at half court. That is to say, the amount of dangerous plays that occur because a player wanted to foul at half court but didn't, then turned, ran, and flagrantly fouled someone are very, very small.

Instead, what the clear path rule seemed to invite is a more continuous flow of basketball, where a player who earns a breakaway gets his opportunity to... well... break away. I do not believe players see incentive in the ability to foul players dangerously from behind. I think ultimately they'd love to prevent two points with a great strip, block, or charge. In lieu of that, they'd like to commit a safe foul. In the rarest of circumstances, again, sometimes a flagrant foul occurs.

InfiniteBaskets 05-07-2013 05:42 PM

Re: wasnt that foul on jefferson at the end a clear path?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Rake2204
Well, there is a safe way to foul a player from behind. In fact, there's a ton of safe ways to do so. In 99% of chasedown situations, defensive players know what play they can make and whether it's going to be safe. They're also very aware of what constitutes a flagrant foul.

And while flagrant fouls occur (and sometimes on accident), they're actually very rare in comparison to non-flagrant chasedown plays or opportunities and likely minuscule when attempting to attribute a dangerous play on a player's reluctance to foul a player at half court. That is to say, the amount of dangerous plays that occur because a player wanted to foul at half court but didn't, then turned, ran, and flagrantly fouled someone are very, very small.


Completely agree there's a safe way to foul a player that's in the air from behind, but that way is not necessary the most high percentage play to make to stop that player from making the shot once he goes up.

Here's an example of a non-safe way to foul a player from behind.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0CsqFCdgcc

Yet the penalty for that is the same as a clear path foul, had Westbrook just grabbed Wade when Wade was flipping the ball up in the air to LeBron.



Meanwhile we see players pulling this kind of act to "draw" clear path fouls.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oB9Wr25PZkU


I see where the league is coming from for clear path fouls, but imo foul from behind the player on a fastbreak should be a little harsher than just regular foul. Maybe for situations when a player is in the air and you don't even come close to blocking the ball as the defender (aka just pushing the offensive player) it should be automatic 2 points and the ball or something.

Rake2204 05-07-2013 06:04 PM

Re: wasnt that foul on jefferson at the end a clear path?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by InfiniteBaskets
Completely agree there's a safe way to foul a player that's in the air from behind, but that way is not necessary the most high percentage play to make to stop that player from making the shot once he goes up.

Here's an example of a non-safe way to foul a player from behind.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0CsqFCdgcc

Yet the penalty for that is the same as a clear path foul, had Westbrook just grabbed Wade when Wade was flipping the ball up in the air to LeBron.



Meanwhile we see players pulling this kind of act to "draw" clear path fouls.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oB9Wr25PZkU


I see where the league is coming from for clear path fouls, but imo foul from behind the player on a fastbreak should be a little harsher than just regular foul. Maybe for situations when a player is in the air and you don't even come close to blocking the ball as the defender (aka just pushing the offensive player) it should be automatic 2 points and the ball or something.

Well, I'm not entirely sure if I see your point. I don't have audio at the moment so maybe that's why. Was that LeBron clip not called a flagrant on Westbrook? I'm guessing it wasn't and that is your point. In that case, I think that issue has more to do with what I feel was a missed flagrant more than an issue with the rule itself. Westbrook's left arm actually made a good play, it's just his right came through in a spot it shouldn't, as players are very unstable when hit in the back while airborne.

Either way, if I had to choose between defensive players always fouling and grabbing players to easily prevent a breakaway and what would have been an automatic two points; and play being encouraged to continue and stressing it be up to the skill of the defense to make a play as opposed to the foul cop out, knowing breakaways can sometimes lead to tough fouls, I'd definitely take the latter.

Regarding punishment, as it stands, the penalty for both flagrant fouls and clear path fouls are steep enough to really discourage players from wanting to make either of those plays happen. There's no longer a lot of players in the league (if anyone) who feels it's worth "taking a flagrant" to send a message or because they deem the play to be worth the punishment.

Finally, Jason Kidd... I think that's a unique scenario. I personally don't feel he was thinking "I want to draw a clear path". Instead, he was making a play a lot of us have over time, where you create space by cutting off a speedy, trailing defender. Again, if I had to be real, I kind of feel like Jefferson was enough a part of that play for it to no longer be a clear path situation. That call wasn't as in spirit with the point of the rule as most other calls I've seen.

InfiniteBaskets 05-07-2013 06:24 PM

Re: wasnt that foul on jefferson at the end a clear path?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Rake2204
Well, I'm not entirely sure if I see your point. I don't have audio at the moment so maybe that's why. Was that LeBron clip not called a flagrant on Westbrook? I'm guessing it wasn't and that is your point. In that case, I think that issue has more to do with what I feel was a missed flagrant more than an issue with the rule itself. Westbrook's left arm actually made a good play, it's just his right came through in a spot it shouldn't, as players are very unstable when hit in the back while airborne.

Either way, if I had to choose between defensive players always fouling and grabbing players to easily prevent a breakaway and what would have been an automatic two points; and play being encouraged to continue and stressing it be up to the skill of the defense to make a play as opposed to the foul cop out, knowing breakaways can sometimes lead to tough fouls, I'd definitely take the latter.

Regarding punishment, as it stands, the penalty for both flagrant fouls and clear path fouls are steep enough to really discourage players from wanting to make either of those plays happen. There's no longer a lot of players in the league (if anyone) who feels it's worth "taking a flagrant" to send a message or because they deem the play to be worth the punishment.



The foul on Westbrook was ruled a flagrant one, as it should have been. My point is that the defense can commit a foul as possibly risky as that one AND at most suffer the same penalty as one where Richard Jefferson harmlessly bumps into Jason Kidd (who imo was trying to draw a clear path foul. He had a clear lane to the basket and made the smart play).

So if you're a smart coach, you will ALWAYS tell your players to wait until the offensive player on the breakaway rise up in the air first before fouling him from behind. Not necessarily because you're trying to injure anyone, but simply because at worst, the penalty is what it would be for a clear path foul. In my opinion, there is an imbalance in the amount of risk to injury compared with penalty to the defense for these types of plays.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:37 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. Terms of Use/Service | Privacy Policy