12-19-2009, 12:03 PM
|
#1
|
Golden Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tyler
Posts: 1,656
|
Brooks was trying to injure Damp-why no flagrant 2? Watch it again.
As they replayed the incident over and over, if you watch as both Damp and Brooks start to come back down, Brooks raised his right leg up under Damp's legs in an obvious attempt to trip him or make him fall awkwardly. I am convince he was deliberately trying to hurt Damp. This is the kind of thing that leads to torn ACLs. I think the way he raised his leg is what caused Damp to land so off balance and fall towards Brooks. Damp saw Brooks' leg come up under him, and that is what pi$$ed him off so much.
I think the Mavs should file a protest that Brooks was not ejected from the game.
Does anybody have a video of of the incident?
|
|
|
12-19-2009, 12:28 PM
|
#2
|
Inactive.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 43,086
|
Is that really the biggest issue? The problem with arguing any call is that if you argue too many you start to sound like you are just a whiner. You may have a legitimate point but A) its pretty hard to prove intent or unsportsmanshiply behavior especially with the size difference B) I doubt it will do any good to make a complaint with the NBA. Stern won't change the outcome by pretending they ejected Brooks, and they arent going to fine/suspend him.
|
|
|
12-19-2009, 12:32 PM
|
#3
|
Guru
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 40,410
|
I thoguth the right call was made except for the technical on dampier. You can argue it wasn't a flagrant but imo it was. For the record I do not believe in hard fouls either for that matter.
It was clearly close enough to be a flagrant, as far as dampier throwing an elbow I didn't see it, on either replay I watched.
|
|
|
12-19-2009, 12:38 PM
|
#4
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: North Laredo
Posts: 7,995
|
Brooks couldn't injure Damp even if he swung a bat at his knees. That goofy duck looking guard is harmless.
__________________
"Dirk Nowitzki is now a household name in every locker room in this world.
You say it in Brazil, you say Dirk, they know Nowitzki. You say it in China,
they know Nowitzki. Kobe, Michael, DIRK." - Jeff Van Gundy
|
|
|
12-19-2009, 12:39 PM
|
#5
|
Inactive.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 43,086
|
Its just incredibly subjective for refs. The refs pissed off the Mavs and the Mave in turn pissed off the refs with their objections. Nine times out of ten that elbow would have gone uncalled, but this was not one of those games. Its like emphatically dunking-- refs wont usually call the tech but they will occasionally. The tech was just the cherry on top of a horribly called game. Mavs needed to keep composure better through the bad calls because obvious frustration with refs often becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
|
|
|
12-19-2009, 12:46 PM
|
#6
|
Golden Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tyler
Posts: 1,656
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick41
Brooks couldn't injure Damp even if he swung a bat at his knees. That goofy duck looking guard is harmless.
|
I disagree completely. If a man as big as Damp comes down wrong on one leg, it would be easy to tear an ACL. I think it was close to an injury, and that was why Damp was so mad. You really need to watch it again. Watch the leg.
Last edited by tgfan; 12-19-2009 at 12:59 PM.
|
|
|
12-19-2009, 12:49 PM
|
#7
|
Golden Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Tyler
Posts: 1,656
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricaLubarsky
Is that really the biggest issue? The problem with arguing any call is that if you argue too many you start to sound like you are just a whiner. You may have a legitimate point but A) its pretty hard to prove intent or unsportsmanshiply behavior especially with the size difference B) I doubt it will do any good to make a complaint with the NBA. Stern won't change the outcome by pretending they ejected Brooks, and they arent going to fine/suspend him.
|
I know it wouldn't change anything, but you have to protect your players. I still say Brooks was trying to hurt Damp by inserting his leg under Damp. I was surprised the refs didn't realize it and throw Brooks out.
|
|
|
12-19-2009, 12:49 PM
|
#8
|
Guru
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 40,410
|
I"d like to watch it again, can you help?
|
|
|
12-19-2009, 12:55 PM
|
#9
|
Inactive.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 43,086
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgfan
I disagree completely. If a man as big as Damp comes down wrong on one leg, it would be easy to tear and ACL. I think it was close to an injury, and that was why Damp was so mad. You really need to watch it again. Watch the leg.
|
How can you disagree completely? Brooks undeniably looks like a bat.
|
|
|
12-19-2009, 02:50 PM
|
#10
|
Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Houston
Posts: 472
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgfan
As they replayed the incident over and over, if you watch as both Damp and Brooks start to come back down, Brooks raised his right leg up under Damp's legs in an obvious attempt to trip him or make him fall awkwardly. I am convince he was deliberately trying to hurt Damp. This is the kind of thing that leads to torn ACLs. I think the way he raised his leg is what caused Damp to land so off balance and fall towards Brooks. Damp saw Brooks' leg come up under him, and that is what pi$$ed him off so much.
I think the Mavs should file a protest that Brooks was not ejected from the game.
Does anybody have a video of of the incident?
|
you come spewing all this crap and dont even have a video.
that whole thing was stupid, should have just been a shooting foul and no T on dampier.
i dont see how you think that was a flagrant 2 when kidd's is just a foul. watch kidd's feet taking 2 steps then jumping into andersen setting a pick.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkfkIDDbJsg
__________________
yes, i am a rockets fan.
|
|
|
12-19-2009, 03:59 PM
|
#11
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,181
|
I didn't think it was a "dirty" play at all and I believe the right call on Brooks was made. However, they can't assess Damp a T.
|
|
|
12-19-2009, 04:09 PM
|
#12
|
Guru
Join Date: May 2001
Location: sport
Posts: 39,434
|
When I saw it live, I thought it was nothing more than a foul.
|
|
|
12-19-2009, 06:51 PM
|
#13
|
Golden Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,050
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgfan
As they replayed the incident over and over, if you watch as both Damp and Brooks start to come back down, Brooks raised his right leg up under Damp's legs in an obvious attempt to trip him or make him fall awkwardly. I am convince he was deliberately trying to hurt Damp. This is the kind of thing that leads to torn ACLs. I think the way he raised his leg is what caused Damp to land so off balance and fall towards Brooks. Damp saw Brooks' leg come up under him, and that is what pi$$ed him off so much.
I think the Mavs should file a protest that Brooks was not ejected from the game.
Does anybody have a video of of the incident?
|
|
|
|
12-19-2009, 06:52 PM
|
#14
|
Platinum Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,885
|
It was not a dirty play. Just a foul to prevent a dunk. Those can look dirty a lot of time because he wasn't in good position to stop it.
|
|
|
12-19-2009, 07:10 PM
|
#15
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: behind you
Posts: 6,248
|
Come on, man. It was just a hard foul, deserving the flagrant-1 it got. As far as I know, Aaron Brooks is not one of those thugs who would try to hurt another player. Why assume the worst?
|
|
|
12-19-2009, 11:50 PM
|
#16
|
Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 5
|
Even the rockets own announcers were making fun of Brooks trying to stop Dampier on that would-be dunk. Brooks is a clean player, like all of the rockets except Ariza.
|
|
|
12-20-2009, 05:04 AM
|
#17
|
Platinum Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: New Mexico Mountains
Posts: 2,399
|
I didn't see the play, but wasnt Stackhouse suspended from the Finals for a flagrant whn he essentially bounced off of Shaq?
__________________
"He got dimes." Harrison Barnes on Luca Doncic during his 1st NBA training camp.
|
|
|
12-20-2009, 09:17 AM
|
#18
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: behind you
Posts: 6,248
|
If anything, Brooks was trying to knee him in the groin, not injure him.
|
|
|
12-20-2009, 09:51 AM
|
#19
|
Platinum Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,154
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by tcat075
If anything, Brooks was trying to knee him in the groin, not injure him.
|
would that really have been better???
Um the question isnt whether it was a foul...it was a foul....BUT why the hell does Damp get thrown out. If I understand correctly he didnt even get to shoot free throws??
And the Mavs are filing a complaint saying that the refs decided that Damp threw an elbow only after reviewing the foul to see if it was a flagerent, at which point they should not have been allowed to make the call on Damp anyway....according to an article I read.
__________________
77
|
|
|
12-20-2009, 02:33 PM
|
#20
|
Inactive.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 43,086
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by G-Man
I didn't see the play, but wasnt Stackhouse suspended from the Finals for a flagrant whn he essentially bounced off of Shaq?
|
It shouldnt matter how big the players are and its true about Stack/Shaq. Stack threw all his weight into Shaq to keep him from going up with a shot on multiple occasions and on at least one occasion that I remember, he recieved the flagrant for it despite making minimal impact on Shaq's movement.
The thing in the NBA is that a flagrant in one game is a PF in another, a shooting foul in another, and a non-call in another. Reffing in the NBA is the most subjective and inconsistent of any sport, except for maybe soccer. At least the NBA will occasionally reverse a horrible call.
This was a Flagrant 1 though, absolutely and undoubtedly with the slim possibility of it being a Flagrant 2. Flagrant 1's are just defined by "unnecessary contact " only. Only if its malicious, unsportsmanlike or attempts harm does a flagrant 1 become a flagrant 2.
People are arguing that its not a flagrant but any time you make significant contact with a players head, its a flagrant. He made a LOT of contact with Dampier including hand contact with Damp's head. You dont have to intend harm to get a flagrant.
And yeah it was bull that Damp gets mauled, and throws a light frustration elbow that leads to this whole fiasco. The refs have a 9 minute huddle and then assess a technical to Dampier? Not that we wanted Dampier to shoot those FTs, but still in the timeline Damp was flagrantly fouled and then was assessed a technical. He shoots FTs, then the Rockets shoot the technical, then Mavs recieve possession with Dampier ejected (2 techs is an automatic ejection no matter how touchy and weak the techs are.)
Last edited by EricaLubarsky; 12-20-2009 at 02:55 PM.
|
|
|
12-20-2009, 03:11 PM
|
#21
|
Rooting for the laundry
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 21,342
|
I love starting a new thread with "watch it again" and no link provided.
|
|
|
12-20-2009, 03:27 PM
|
#22
|
Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Miami
Posts: 751
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flacolaco
I love starting a new thread with "watch it again" and no link provided.
|
I was thinking the exact same thing...
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nowitzki4President
Nowitzki4President is the greatest man to ever live!
|
|
|
|
12-20-2009, 03:42 PM
|
#23
|
Diamond Member
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Between Blue Lines
Posts: 4,425
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flacolaco
I love starting a new thread with "watch it again" and no link provided.
|
http://www.dallas-mavs.com/vb/showth...40#post1051840
__________________
"I still go through it in my head," Nowitzki said. "One of my last nights in Germany [last month], I was trying to go to sleep, but I couldn't. I was thinking about the free throw I missed [late in Game 3], about different situations that happened in that series. I'll never forget it. It's going to stay in my mind until we win it all."
|
|
|
12-20-2009, 09:48 PM
|
#24
|
Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 1
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by tgfan
As they replayed the incident over and over, if you watch as both Damp and Brooks start to come back down, Brooks raised his right leg up under Damp's legs in an obvious attempt to trip him or make him fall awkwardly. I am convince he was deliberately trying to hurt Damp. This is the kind of thing that leads to torn ACLs. I think the way he raised his leg is what caused Damp to land so off balance and fall towards Brooks. Damp saw Brooks' leg come up under him, and that is what pi$$ed him off so much.
I think the Mavs should file a protest that Brooks was not ejected from the game.
Does anybody have a video of of the incident?
|
and you are the reason why everybody thinks that we are all whiners. brooks was just trying to prevent the dunk. as far as i know the only player who is sketchy on the rockets is trevor ariza. he took out rudy fernandez and then tried to elbow some other dude in the back of the head a week ago.
we lost. the officiating was bad yeah. but at least it was bad both ways. landry got assessed a foul for hitting dirk's elbow with his face?
kidd clearly attacked andersen for god knows wat reason.
that was a bad game all in all.
we just got to regroup and get a win against cleveland. who cares about the rockets.
|
|
|
12-21-2009, 11:55 AM
|
#25
|
Platinum Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: TX
Posts: 2,505
|
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...si_mostpopular
Official protest filed...just worded in such a way that it could actually be filed.
No doubt, that game was an example of Tim Donaghy talks about regarding the NBA, but to prove it is no doubt nearly impossible.
It's clear the NBA will rule against Cuban, but it at least gives him a resource to file the complaint ... it's cheaper than a fine.
|
|
|
01-04-2010, 03:13 PM
|
#26
|
Golden Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: the G
Posts: 1,299
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by 92bDad
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...si_mostpopular
Official protest filed...just worded in such a way that it could actually be filed.
No doubt, that game was an example of Tim Donaghy talks about regarding the NBA, but to prove it is no doubt nearly impossible.
It's clear the NBA will rule against Cuban, but it at least gives him a resource to file the complaint ... it's cheaper than a fine.
|
the decision should come these days, and honestly, I am curious what they say is here different to the Hawks-Heat situation:
Quote:
The Atlanta Hawks and Miami Heat must replay the final 51.9 seconds of their game last month because the official scorer ruled incorrectly that Shaquille O'Neal fouled out, the league said Friday.
|
Awarding a player with a 6th foul, when it's actually the fifth should not be handled any different than awarding a player with a sixth foul, when they are (wrong and) by rule prohibited to make that decision in such a situation.
Last edited by mavErika; 01-04-2010 at 03:13 PM.
|
|
|
01-04-2010, 03:51 PM
|
#27
|
Guru
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Brasil
Posts: 15,401
|
Of course they will reject, im also just curious with which blabla they will separate this case from the Hawks-Heat.
|
|
|
01-05-2010, 07:51 PM
|
#28
|
Golden Member
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: the G
Posts: 1,299
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by sefant77
Of course they will reject, im also just curious with which blabla they will separate this case from the Hawks-Heat.
|
It seems they figured it wouldn't need much blabla this time, as nobody remembers the circumstances, or even cares anymore, more than two weeks after the game.
Quote:
NBA denies Mavs' protest of Dampier ejection
By Official release
Posted Jan 5 2010 6:34PM
NEW YORK, January 5, 2010 -- The National Basketball Association announced today that Commissioner David Stern has denied the Dallas Mavericks' protest of their 116-108 loss to the Houston Rockets on December 18.
In the protest, the Mavericks argued that the referees, following an instant replay review, improperly called a technical foul on Erick Dampier with 1:01 remaining in overtime, which -- as his second technical foul -- resulted in his ejection from the game.
Commissioner Stern determined that the referees' decision to assess a technical foul on Dampier was a judgment call, and not a misapplication of the playing rules, which cannot successfully be protested under NBA rules.
|
http://www.nba.com/2010/news/01/05/m...s=iref:nbahpt2
Last edited by mavErika; 01-05-2010 at 07:52 PM.
Reason: link
|
|
|
01-05-2010, 07:53 PM
|
#29
|
Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 61
|
NBA denies Mavs' protest of Dampier ejection
NEW YORK, January 5, 2010 -- The National Basketball Association announced today that Commissioner David Stern has denied the Dallas Mavericks' protest of their 116-108 loss to the Houston Rockets on December 18.
In the protest, the Mavericks argued that the referees, following an instant replay review, improperly called a technical foul on Erick Dampier with 1:01 remaining in overtime, which -- as his second technical foul -- resulted in his ejection from the game.
Commissioner Stern determined that the referees' decision to assess a technical foul on Dampier was a judgment call, and not a misapplication of the playing rules, which cannot successfully be protested under NBA rules.
http://www.nba.com/2010/news/01/05/m...s=iref:nbahpt2
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:35 AM.
|