AboveLegit Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 If you have been watching the Cleveland-Orlando game, Jeff Van Gundy began his usual rant, this time about the foul out rule in the league. He went on to say the fans are robbed of getting to see their favorite players play most of the game, and thus, ruins some of the excitement in the game. Do you believe there should be a foul out rule in the NBA today? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diesel Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 Yeah there should otherwise we'd see people getting mauled countless amount of times. It really shouldn't be a problem except when refs treat the bigs unfairly giving them the most [expletive] fouls. It started happening with Shaq in Miami and it happens with Yao/Dwight too. They get the lamest fouls just because their so big. While guys like Kobe do crap that's way worse and don't get called for anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Check my Stats Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 Yes if you take out the fouls it ruins a HUGE element and factor of the game. Big men would be getting fouled when they touched the ball right away, the penalty wouldn't even be a threat anymore with big men being the only ones fouled. Sorry but Van Gundy might be a good coach, but he is a moron IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AboveLegit Posted November 12, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 (edited) Well, Van Gundy connected this to the NFL, he said something along the lines of..."You don't see football players getting thrown out after committing three holding penalties." I don't have a strong stance on this whole topic, I think Jeff has a good argument, but there's always the thought of a player committing too many fouls. Edited November 12, 2009 by Eastcoast Assassin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cleveland's Finest Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 No....has fouling out really affected that many games? It's an aspect of the game that should not be removed. It's not like every game LeBron, Dwight, and Kobe are fouling out and the fans are begging for their money back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owner Real Deal Posted November 12, 2009 Owner Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 Why would he compare a holding penalty to an NBA foul? In the NBA, a foul can be good, if someone is about to rip the rim off the glass. Fouling Shaq and sending him to the line for 50% shooting is good. In the NFL, a penalty will lose 5-15 yards. You hold, personal foul, pass interference, grounding, whatever...there's nothing positive about them, at all. He's wrong. Basketball (NBA, college and HS) needs the foul-out rule. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Check my Stats Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 (edited) Well, Van Gundy connected this to the NFL, he said something along the lines of..."You don't see football players getting thrown out after committing three holding penalties." I don't have a strong stance on this whole topic, I think Jeff has a good argument, but there's always the thought of a player committing too many fouls. I would like to say he has a point, but he doesn't. When there is a holding penalty the other team doesn't get a chance to get a free point or two out of it. Like I said, I think he is an idiot, I respect his coaching, but yeah.... You can't really compare penalties in different sports because the repercussions of a penalty is different in each. I just completely disagree, if you are making constant mistakes you should be penalized. I know in minor hockey 3 stick infractions like hooking and slashing you get the boot in that game, I don't know about the pros but yeah... And the fans are being robbed? Usually it is scrubs fouling out, stars probably foul out 5 times a year on the high end, and usually they don't foul out until the fourth. I am glad I wasn't watching when he said this I might have thrown my TV down the stairs. Edited November 12, 2009 by travesy3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Feelgood Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 Yes, there should definitely be a foul out rule in the league. It's been said many times in the topic the same reasons that I have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poe Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 Why would he compare a holding penalty to an NBA foul? In the NBA, a foul can be good, if someone is about to rip the rim off the glass. Fouling Shaq and sending him to the line for 50% shooting is good. In the NFL, a penalty will lose 5-15 yards. You hold, personal foul, pass interference, grounding, whatever...there's nothing positive about them, at all. He's wrong. Basketball (NBA, college and HS) needs the foul-out rule.The NBA already has a penalty-like rule. After a certain amount of team fouls each quarter, a team gets into the penalty, and the opponent gets sent to the line on any foul until the quarter ends. After a team is in the penalty, every foul on the defensive end against decent free throw shooters is a failed defensive possession. The foul out rule is unneeded because all it does is lower a player's aggression and/or minutes, yet the role players are still willing to foul. The only thing that stops a team as a whole from being less likely to foul is if the opponent will be sent to the free throw line. Besides, the game is more fun to watch when both teams are aggressive, and when the best players have to lower their aggression due to not being able to foul, it makes the game less exciting. I think the main reason Van Gundy is complaining about this is because the foul out rule works against his system. I actually agree with it, though, but I don't find it a pressing issue. I always felt fouls in general were called too often, anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owner Real Deal Posted November 12, 2009 Owner Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 The NBA already has a penalty-like rule. After a certain amount of team fouls each quarter, a team gets into the penalty, and the opponent gets sent to the line on any foul until the quarter ends. After a team is in the penalty, every foul on the defensive end against decent free throw shooters is a failed defensive possession. That's not the point. In the NBA, fouls can be good. If someone wants to foul Shaq every single time he gets the ball, they'd be able to, and his team would be forced to score single points, on free throws, as long as they have him in the game. I'm sure when Shaq tries to get his 20+ against Dwight Howard in the playoffs, the Cavs would be irate if Howard was allowed to foul him the 20+ times he gets ready to shoot the ball, a very easy way to build a 10+ point lead on a team early, wearing Shaq down as well, and increasing the risk of injuries as the rate at which teams foul increases. The idea of a sport is to try not to foul. In the NBA, fouls can benefit your team. What "foul" in the NFL helps you? Therefore, you put a limit on each player. Otherwise, you change the game, dramatically, and definitely not for the better. Basketball is a sport, not sports entertainment. I don't care if Dwight Howard is in the game for 48 minutes, or five minutes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Built Ford Tough Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 Absolutely there should. Could you imagine how terrible the games would be if players weren't able to foul out? When teams played players like Shaquille O'Neal, Dwight Howard or other players like this who aren't good at shooting free throws, they could literally just sit there and foul them every single time they touch the ball because odds are that they are just as likely to go 0-2 from the line than 2-2. The games would be played at an absolute snails pace and would be unwatchable. The NBA would turn into a free throw shooting contest more so than a contest of all around basketball skill. There honestly isn't any good that would come from taking away the foul out rule. Van Gundy is just pissed off that Dwight Howard can't seem to stay on the floor right now because of fouls. It would be absolutely retarded if players couldn't foul out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sun Tzu Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 Without the foul out rule the NBA wouldn't be as good as it is now, the fouling system would be abused and also the game would turn into slam ball minus the trampolines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papertrail Posted November 12, 2009 Report Share Posted November 12, 2009 If there was no foul out rule in the NBA, it would be a horrible league. You'd see more pushing & shoving than the actual game itself. Not to mention the pace of the game would be so much slower, guys would be at the line just about every possession. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.