Chicago Bulls 2009-10 Thread

A forum for non-baseball sports
Post Reply
User avatar
epinephrine
Veteran Player
Posts: 772
Joined: August 4 09, 9:24 pm
Location: 815, IL

Re: Chicago Bulls 2009-10 Thread

Post by epinephrine »

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

Post by Socnorb11 »

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

Post by jim »

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.

Socnorb11
The Last Word
Posts: 21908
Joined: June 21 06, 8:45 am

Re: Chicago Bulls 2009-10 Thread

Post by Socnorb11 »

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.
Yeah........ I disagree. Get the call right.

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

Post by jim »

Socnorb11 wrote:
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.
Yeah........ I disagree. Get the call right.

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.
I don't care about anyone else but myself, so your last point is really pretty irrelevant.... IMO.


(it was a good game though).

User avatar
Hungary Jack
Mother Earth
Posts: 19536
Joined: July 24 06, 6:03 am
Location: In Cognito

Re: Chicago Bulls 2009-10 Thread

Post by Hungary Jack »

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

Post by phins »

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.

jim
Red Lobster for the seafood lover in you
Posts: 50393
Joined: May 1 06, 2:41 pm

Re: Chicago Bulls 2009-10 Thread

Post by jim »

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.
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.

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

Post by phins »

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

Post by jim »

Another fun filled night of watching officials hunkered down over a TV screen for too long while the Bulls lose another.

Post Reply