Worst Rule in the NBA???

[droopdog7]

Fanfir makes a good point.....what difference should it make where your dribble....it's your 24 second clock....you should be able to play it anyway you want in my mind.....I enjoy a Gary Payton type player dribbling with his back to the basket, trying to get an angle or wait until his man makes a wrong move....are we all so inpatient now that we can' sit still for 24 seconds ...more like 15-20 seconds once the ball gets in the right spot....

It's all just opinion but I hate that call....I would like to know how many times it's been called since the start of the season...

You are correct in that opinions differ on what is good basketball.  But if you don't remember what stimulated this rule change, my guess is you'd be sorry as to what this game might revert to.

And stop this stuff about using the clock any way you want.  Because as silly as it sounds, your statement puts into question all of the rules (including traveling, dribbling, 3 secs, etc.). 

Unless you want to qualify your stance somehow.

[Master Po]

droopdog7 ...you have a tone about you that would not be conducive to one of us face to face.....

I have no idea why you would make the leap that I would be in favor of banning soemting as basic to the game as traveling, dribbling etc...just because of this one rule that has me miffed ...unless of course you making this leap  to trivialize my one opinion I have about one specific rule by lumping it in with absurd suggestions about the basic rules of the game. That is demeaning and again if you can't address me in a tone a bit less "up in my face" then don't address me at all... Got it? Because I have a rule about taking crap off people like you.

[dark_lord]

it isnt necessarily the worst rule....its the people who interpret and enforce them

[barefacedmonk]

The crab dribble should be called everytime.

[Fan from VT]

Here's my question: Now that you are allowed to play a pseudo-zone for a few seconds (which you were not allowed to do when the 5-second rule was implemented, I believe), does this rule matter as much? In other words, if a player is dribbling for a long time in the post, a near player can double team and a far player can sag into the post, etc.

[Master Po]

if I understand you correctly then it really does not matter as much, which I guess is why I have rarely seen this called because people don't do it much because it can be defended. When you say "long time" - the most it could be is 24 seconds....
I think there is not a whole lot dribbling like Rondo did yesterday because for the most part it makes no sense to do what RR did in most circumstances....but a team should be allowed to do it (good or bad strategy) depending on a specific matchup  or whatever the reasoning

[droopdog7]

droopdog7 ...you have a tone about you that would not be conducive to one of us face to face.....

I have no idea why you would make the leap that I would be in favor of banning soemting as basic to the game as traveling, dribbling etc...just because of this one rule that has me miffed ...unless of course you making this leap  to trivialize my one opinion I have about one specific rule by lumping it in with absurd suggestions about the basic rules of the game. That is demeaning and again if you can't address me in a tone a bit less "up in my face" then don't address me at all... Got it? Because I have a rule about taking crap off people like you.

And you need to develop thicker skin.  This is a message board and I am allowed to express my opinion.  The first time I did was not even remotely offensive (all things considered) and you were offended even then.  And quit the face to face internet tough guy talk.  I think we all know that ain't happening and it would be good for at least one of us, but probably both that it won't.

My point is simple.  You are making a statment that says essentially, anything goes for 24 seconds.  So if you want to qualify by saying that dribbling should be included, fine.  My question is, what else should be allowed or disallowed.  Afterall, dribbling wasn't in the original rules anyway.  So who says what is acceptable and what isn't.

I and many others have made the point that the rule was instituted to prevent guys from backing a man down for an exessive amount of time.  This was by many considered boring basketball and not all what was intended by Naismith (to be sure).

Your counter point is to say that they should be able to do what they want.  My point is that you are not making a good argument and I have taken it to the extreme to show you why. 

So again, we have a ten year (or so) rule that you have not noticed.  It probably bugs you that you have not noticed it, and I am guessing that this is part of the reason why you don't like it.  But you haven't given any real reason as to why it is a bad rule or how removing it would improve the game. 

[Master Po]

on my way home...but I will work on a reply....just for you....

[Finkelskyhook]

Fanfir makes a good point.....what difference should it make where your dribble....it's your 24 second clock....you should be able to play it anyway you want in my mind.....I enjoy a Gary Payton type player dribbling with his back to the basket, trying to get an angle or wait until his man makes a wrong move....are we all so inpatient now that we can' sit still for 24 seconds ...more like 15-20 seconds once the ball gets in the right spot....

It's all just opinion but I hate that call....I would like to know how many times it's been called since the start of the season...

Since the NBA is second only to MLB in keeping meaningless statistics, you could probably find out if you wanted to.

[Bingbangbarros]

Its not called often because players rarely do it anymore.

[MBz]

I know people are arguing about the back down 5 second rule, but I think it's a good solid rule.  Yesterday, shouldn't be used as an example because House was fouling Rondo, but why should an offensive player be allowed to initiate contact and just keep backing down continually until the defender has nowhere to go? A rule needed to be put into play in this situation to help the defender out or else guys like Dwight Howard would get the ball in 15 feet away and back guys down for 15 seconds then take a shot.  Everyone seems to be talking about the offensive player, but the defensive player needs to at least have a chance in covering him.  I like rules which tend to reward the defender as there aren't too many in the NBA anymore, everything tends to help the offensive side of the ball.  I think the other 5 second violation(not sure how they are distinguished) is a great rule too or else we would have guys pivoting around for 20 seconds just to waste clock.

[looseball]

I have been watching the NBA since 1968......It's your opinion it's a great rule and it's my opinion it's a terrible rule.....I think you should be able to use the 24 seconds how you choose....

and for your information...that is rarely called...I missed it for 10 years...not good on my part....but I don't need your smart mouth....I was merely stating my opinion....

Master Po is right, this is a dumb rule. You should be able to use the 24 seconds as you like, and if refs want to call it then call it consistently, not once every 2-3 years. Also, on that play, House was using both hands on Rondo, which is a foul, which is why Rondo kept dribbling for so long. The correct call was a foul on House, yet the refs pulled out one of the most rarely enforced rules in a key moment of a close game to give the ball to the Heat. Total garbage imo.

I agree with your "total garbage" assessment of the call.  (TP for both you guys.)  When the refs make a call like that, at that point in the game, it shows they are predetermined to make a call against the Celts and for the Heat.  They are intent on influencing the outcome of the game, and are shameless in doing so.

This is the big weakness of the NBA.  The league-sanctioned influence on games exercised by the refs reeks of puppetry, and cheapens an otherwise spectacular sport.