http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/10832044/dwight-howard-lamarcus-aldridge-fouling-first-round-nba-playoffs For those who who don't have access (yes, I get ESPN the magazine, make fun of me later): basically the author doesn't like that players in basketball can foul out, because in Game 1of Houston-Portland, the biggest stars for each team, Dwight Howard and LMA, were on the bench at the end of the game due to fouling out. He offers 3 proposals to stop this "problem" from happening again: 1) Allow an extra foul per OT period, 2) do away with foul limits altogether, or 3) treat personal fouls after 6 the same as team technical fouls. Personally I think it's a load of crap. 6 personal fouls per game are plenty. This guy must like watching FT contests. What say you? Anybody have a problem with players being able to foul out of basketball games?
I'm actually on board with either 1 or 2 & 3 together. Personal fouls after 6 should be Technical + Foul, and players shouldn't foul out. At the very least, allow one more foul in OT for players who haven't already fouled out in regulation.
The reason why I like foul limits is that it forces guys to play smart. They can't just throw their bodies around like it doesn't mean anything. But, then again, if a star like Howard has five fouls, it makes the refs less likely to call a foul on him because they don't want him to foul out. I think there are arguments to be made on both sides.
I like the argument pointed out in the other recent thread discussing this concept: In no other sport are player penalties piled up on individual players. Referees can't sent offensive linemen to the sidelines for too many false starts. Teams aren't forced to pull their third baseman if he impedes a baserunner. Yes, you can be sent to the penalty box for high-sticking, but then you're back out in two minutes, and you can't be permanently booted for collecting too many penalty minutes. Only in basketball can you be permanently removed from the game for too many minor rules violations. Edit: I guess that was never brought up in the other thread. Whatever--I know I read someone else make that point recently, and it made a lot of sense.
Six personal fouls should be plenty for the regulation 48 minutes (well, unless your name is Joel Freeland and you're tasked with guarding Howard, in which case that only equates to about 3 minutes of playing time). I'd like to see them add an extra foul for each OT period.
Two Yellows equals a Red and your outta there in the World's favorite game. If anything I agree with extra fouls for OT. But having a cap overall is essential to keeping control of the game.
I was about to say yeah... Maybe we use Flagrants like that in an unlimited Personal Foul Limit scenario. But then that just encourages diving/flopping...
Well, those would be more equivalent to a flagrant or Techs. But, if you string 4 or 5 regular fouls in a short time span, you'll likely get a yellow.
First of all--soccer, lol. Second, I said minor rules violations. Yellow cards are basically flagrant fouls, right? Or like unnecessary roughness penalties? You make multiple of either of those, you get booted too, because you're behaving in a manner that's outside the game. It's not a valid comparison.
God dammit. I didn't see that thread. I even looked to see if this topic had been brought up because I didn't want to be "that guy" who misses a thread then starts the exact same thread 10 minutes later... First thread I start on this forum and I fail! Oh well. So it looks like most people in that thread would be open to option #1? Of the 3, that is most palatable to me if a change were to be forced. I can see the logic in it. I'm still against changing it though. I'd prefer to keep it the same if possible. I think adding more fouls just adds to the catering to superstars that we already see too much of, if that makes any sense. Even though superstars are the least likely to foul out as it is anyway. Obviously the bigger problem at work here is the refs being so damn inconsistent with their calls. If players knew what was reliably a foul and what wasn't from game to game and opponent to opponent, there might not be a need to change this rule.
Fuck that! If you cant stay in the game, then stay the fuck out! Allowing shit like this will only slow the game down and allow players to foul instead of defend. Go Blazers!
Each sport has it's own uniqueness - that's what makes them their respective sports. If we made all sports the same, what would be the point? There is a level of grace, agility, and control in basketball that I don't think exists in most other sports. That factors in playing defense, and in solid defense, you pick up fouls in your aggressiveness, but you learn to play with control and restraint. Generally guys that play with restraint and control are not effected, and don't foul out. I think fouling out is just the overall design of the game. I'd have a guy like D-Ho just murder everyone if it wasn't.
Seems to me refs should just have an ethic to swallow the whistle within reason in playoff games. The flopping rule didn't really work out that well at 5k per fine after a warning. I don't want the end of games to be decided at the freethrow line. They tend to not call charges or travels in OT much. The problem with the extra foul is that some guys benefit in OT and someone may foul out in regulation, not getting the extra foul I agree with Gary Payton, hand checking should make a comeback
I have brought it up a few times. I posted my thoughts about the personal foul recently, but I forget where.
They just need to stop calling ticky-tac shit. It seems that about 1/3rd of the calls they make are bogus.
