Chicago Bulls 2009-10 Thread
- epinephrine
- Veteran Player
- Posts: 772
- Joined: August 4 09, 9:24 pm
- Location: 815, IL
Re: Chicago Bulls 2009-10 Thread
LeBron has stated he wants to win ... conclusively, he isn't going to the Knicks.
-
Socnorb11
- The Last Word
- Posts: 21908
- Joined: June 21 06, 8:45 am
Re: Chicago Bulls 2009-10 Thread
Whale of a game between my Nuggets and the Bulls tonight. Whew!
-
jim
- Red Lobster for the seafood lover in you
- Posts: 50393
- Joined: May 1 06, 2:41 pm
Re: Chicago Bulls 2009-10 Thread
Instant replay just sucks ass in all sports. It doesn't belong. Real exciting watching a bunch of idiots hunkered over a TV screen and then deciding that maybe ... and I mean maybe ... one angle had the ball a nanometer on his fingertip.
Screw instant replay. Get it the hell out of all sports. It doesn't belong.
Screw instant replay. Get it the hell out of all sports. It doesn't belong.
-
Socnorb11
- The Last Word
- Posts: 21908
- Joined: June 21 06, 8:45 am
Re: Chicago Bulls 2009-10 Thread
Yeah........ I disagree. Get the call right.jim wrote:Instant replay just sucks ass in all sports. It doesn't belong. Real exciting watching a bunch of idiots hunkered over a TV screen and then deciding that maybe ... and I mean maybe ... one angle had the ball a nanometer on his fingertip.
Screw instant replay. Get it the hell out of all sports. It doesn't belong.
But if we weren't debating the use instant replay, we'd be arguing about the officials blowing the call. Either way, you're not going to please everyone.
-
jim
- Red Lobster for the seafood lover in you
- Posts: 50393
- Joined: May 1 06, 2:41 pm
Re: Chicago Bulls 2009-10 Thread
I don't care about anyone else but myself, so your last point is really pretty irrelevant.... IMO.Socnorb11 wrote:Yeah........ I disagree. Get the call right.jim wrote:Instant replay just sucks ass in all sports. It doesn't belong. Real exciting watching a bunch of idiots hunkered over a TV screen and then deciding that maybe ... and I mean maybe ... one angle had the ball a nanometer on his fingertip.
Screw instant replay. Get it the hell out of all sports. It doesn't belong.
But if we weren't debating the use instant replay, we'd be arguing about the officials blowing the call. Either way, you're not going to please everyone.
(it was a good game though).
- Hungary Jack
- Mother Earth
- Posts: 19536
- Joined: July 24 06, 6:03 am
- Location: In Cognito
Re: Chicago Bulls 2009-10 Thread
Still trying to figure out how the refs saw enough to overturn the call. I guess the ball was still touching Miller's fingertips when the clock expired. That is undoubtedly the closest replay I have ever seen, and probably will ever see. I didn't think it was possible to catch and shoot in .3 seconds.
-
phins
- Sobbing quietly during Fox programming
- Posts: 12085
- Joined: June 9 06, 3:51 pm
Re: Chicago Bulls 2009-10 Thread
In the college game they take out of the refs hands by having a rule that .3 seconds or less you have to tip it only. you can't catch and shoot. That was a really close replay, and it took 10 minutes. That's too much...
I agree though...get the call right.
I agree though...get the call right.
-
jim
- Red Lobster for the seafood lover in you
- Posts: 50393
- Joined: May 1 06, 2:41 pm
Re: Chicago Bulls 2009-10 Thread
I didn't think it was possible to rebound the ball and call timeout in .3 seconds either, but they ruled that that's exactly what the Bulls did. There were .6 seconds when he missed the free throw, Noah rebounds AND calls timeout in .3? I don't think so. Is there a b-ball rule where you can just tell the ref to call timeout for you after you get possession? That is the only possible way I could see that.Hungary Jack wrote:Still trying to figure out how the refs saw enough to overturn the call. I guess the ball was still touching Miller's fingertips when the clock expired. That is undoubtedly the closest replay I have ever seen, and probably will ever see. I didn't think it was possible to catch and shoot in .3 seconds.
And personally I think the rule where you take the ball out at the hash the last whatever (1 minute?) of a half and game is pretty contrived. So I'm not sure the play should have ever happened, but since it did I still can't see how they overturned it. It had to have been the overhead shot which they only showed on TV once or twice. Every other angle it sure looked like the ball was out of his hands.
-
phins
- Sobbing quietly during Fox programming
- Posts: 12085
- Joined: June 9 06, 3:51 pm
Re: Chicago Bulls 2009-10 Thread
I've always wondered about the advancing of the ball with a timeout as well Jim...seems like a weird rule.
-
jim
- Red Lobster for the seafood lover in you
- Posts: 50393
- Joined: May 1 06, 2:41 pm
Re: Chicago Bulls 2009-10 Thread
Another fun filled night of watching officials hunkered down over a TV screen for too long while the Bulls lose another.

