All one of them. There was one block that was called that looked clean. Lots of iffy calls both ways so a bad call on a blocked shot didn't lead to a double digit loss. I'd say 2-22 from behind the arc had more to do with it and you can't blame the refs for that.
My point isn’t to quibble over semantics. Instead, it’s to quell an ongoing, and inaccurate, narrative that games are called in any particular way in any particular conference.
Exactly. No flow with so many fouls and the game drags. Go to 4 quarters and reset the fouls every 10 minutes so we don’t have to watch teams shoot in the bonus on hand checks from the 12 minute mark on.
:
When I 1st played basketball as a kid it was like that, I think they added the 1 and 1 foul when I was in 7th grade. But I do prefer the actual jump ball over the alternating possession to be honest. When did that come in? 80s? I remember actual jump balls on a tie up all the way through my high school years (late 70s) I think?Of course---we could always revert the rules to the early to the early 1960s before we went from quarters to halves and before there was a 3 point line.
Every single foul was a shooting foul (floor fouls were all 1 shot). Every tie up actually involved jumping the ball between the two players involved. Jump balls in those cases were at the nearest FT line unless the tie up was near mid-court. Another quirk involved allowing the offensive player to score a bucket when he committed a charge on the play--if he released the shot before he made contact with the defender. After such a score you marched to the other end for the defender to shoot his FT. I still remember a well known official of that day, Steve Honzo, calling jump balls on fouls when he wasn't sure if it was a charge or a block rather than swallowing his whistle or guessing. He would blow the whistle and then announce: "I didn't see it. We will jump it." (No TV monitors tor reviewing plays.) Hoops has certainly come a long way since those days.
Of course---we could always revert the rules to the early to the early 1960s before we went from quarters to halves and before there was a 3 point line.
Every single foul was a shooting foul (floor fouls were all 1 shot). Every tie up actually involved jumping the ball between the two players involved. Jump balls in those cases were at the nearest FT line unless the tie up was near mid-court. Another quirk involved allowing the offensive player to score a bucket when he committed a charge on the play--if he released the shot before he made contact with the defender. After such a score you marched to the other end for the defender to shoot his FT. I still remember a well known official of that day, Steve Honzo, calling jump balls on fouls when he wasn't sure if it was a charge or a block rather than swallowing his whistle or guessing. He would blow the whistle and then announce: "I didn't see it. We will jump it." (No TV monitors tor reviewing plays.) Hoops has certainly come a long way since those days.
But I think actually jumping makes it more of a competition than the randomness of alternate possession.
Of course---we could always revert the rules to the early to the early 1960s before we went from quarters to halves and before there was a 3 point line.
Every single foul was a shooting foul (floor fouls were all 1 shot). Every tie up actually involved jumping the ball between the two players involved. Jump balls in those cases were at the nearest FT line unless the tie up was near mid-court. Another quirk involved allowing the offensive player to score a bucket when he committed a charge on the play--if he released the shot before he made contact with the defender. After such a score you marched to the other end for the defender to shoot his FT. I still remember a well known official of that day, Steve Honzo, calling jump balls on fouls when he wasn't sure if it was a charge or a block rather than swallowing his whistle or guessing. He would blow the whistle and then announce: "I didn't see it. We will jump it." (No TV monitors tor reviewing plays.) Hoops has certainly come a long way since those days.
It doesn't have to be fair, it's the luck of the draw. Is it fair that Terrell Brown had to guard that 7-4 guy, and I think Pitt actually won that opening tip.
Actually jumping makes the game based on an athletic action, rather than just which way an arrow is pointing, that's more random, which means you want the ODD way of doing things. If you're down 1 with 10 seconds left and there's a tie up, and the arrow is against you, you likely lose, but if there's an actual jump ball, the game suddenly become MORE interesting, not less. Ridiculous randomness is an arrow, which way that stupid arrow is pointing decides the game sometimes, takes it out of the players hands, modern people are IDIOTS "worried" that the refs toss of the ball might not be perfect or if a short guy has to jump with a tall guy, so what? It's a sport, better that it be decided by a player's physical action than a rule book.
Then I imagine you remember Eddie Plank, Earl Ceh, Dutch Shample and Gene Steratore, SR, too.
Those were the days!
That's ok by me, it's better than just an arrow IMO. Just like I hate replay, I don't mind officiating errors here and there, that's life.
