If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   In order to win on a last second buzzer beater, the Phoenix Suns' coach called a play he's kept secret for 15 years   ( sports.yahoo.com) divider line
    More: Cool, Phoenix Suns coach, National Basketball Association, perfect inbound pass, Suns forward Dragan, center Tyson Chandler, game-winning alley-oop dunk, Grizzlies big man, star slams teammate  
•       •       •

1870 clicks; posted to Sports » on 28 Dec 2017 at 8:10 AM (28 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



12 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2017-12-28 08:34:58 AM  
Read the little blurb by the coach and saw the replay of it and congrats to the coach (and players).  I'm guessing that the rule book will be changed next year though.
 
2017-12-28 09:15:29 AM  
David Stern knew it yesterday. I'm surprised this play involved passing
 
2017-12-28 10:01:46 AM  

smd31: Read the little blurb by the coach and saw the replay of it and congrats to the coach (and players).  I'm guessing that the rule book will be changed next year though.


As long as the ball never touched the rim or the backboard before Chandler caught it, and as long as Chandler caught it outside the cylinder, I have no problem with that play.
 
2017-12-28 10:38:50 AM  

IlGreven: smd31: Read the little blurb by the coach and saw the replay of it and congrats to the coach (and players).  I'm guessing that the rule book will be changed next year though.

As long as the ball never touched the rim or the backboard before Chandler caught it, and as long as Chandler caught it outside the cylinder, I have no problem with that play.


FTA, even if he touched it in the cylinder it was legal.
 
2017-12-28 10:46:57 AM  

IlGreven: smd31: Read the little blurb by the coach and saw the replay of it and congrats to the coach (and players).  I'm guessing that the rule book will be changed next year though.

As long as the ball never touched the rim or the backboard before Chandler caught it, and as long as Chandler caught it outside the cylinder, I have no problem with that play.


I can only find a copy of the 2014 rules, and I can't imagine that the rules regarding interference have changed much. There's basically 3 relevant parts to the interference rule:
A player shall not:
a. Touch the ball or the basket ring when the ball is using the basket ring as its lower base or hang on the rim while the ball is passing through.
EXCEPTION: If a player near his own basket has his hand legally in contact with the ball, it is not a  violation if his contact with the ball continues after the ball enters the cylinder, or if, in such action, he touches the basket.
b. Touch any ball from within the playing area when it is above the basket ring and within the imaginary cylinder.
f. Touch any ball from within the playing area that is on its downward flight with an opportunity to score. This is considered to be a "field goal attempt" or trying for a goal.

According to part b of the rule that should not be called basket interference because the ball didn't come from within the playing area (although the playing area doesn't seem to be strictly defined in the rule book - it could conceivably include some out of bounds area and if it did then it would be interference). Part f doesn't apply, because of the chance to score requirement. However, part a would still apply if you consider the ball to be on the rim - essentially you have to treat an inbounds pass as a rebound and can't pull it off the rim to prevent a violation. It's probably a stretch to consider that ball on the rim though, it certainly wasn't sitting on the rim.
 
2017-12-28 10:48:43 AM  

RichPoorBoy: IlGreven: smd31: Read the little blurb by the coach and saw the replay of it and congrats to the coach (and players).  I'm guessing that the rule book will be changed next year though.

As long as the ball never touched the rim or the backboard before Chandler caught it, and as long as Chandler caught it outside the cylinder, I have no problem with that play.

FTA, even if he touched it in the cylinder it was legal.


Correct - since you cannot by definition shoot a shot as an in-bounds pass (ie. on an inbounds pass, even if the ball goes in the hoop it cannot count since it cannot be a legal shot) then you also cannot by definition goal-tend an inbounds pass.  That is, all of the rules regarding what you can and can't do to interfere or assist with a shot do not apply.  It only becomes a "shot" when Chandler touches it, and at that point it is HIS shot.  I don't really see a reason to change that regulation since it's not hard at all to defend against that play as long as the players understand what the rules are.
 
2017-12-28 11:00:04 AM  

cefm: RichPoorBoy: IlGreven: smd31: Read the little blurb by the coach and saw the replay of it and congrats to the coach (and players).  I'm guessing that the rule book will be changed next year though.

As long as the ball never touched the rim or the backboard before Chandler caught it, and as long as Chandler caught it outside the cylinder, I have no problem with that play.

FTA, even if he touched it in the cylinder it was legal.

Correct - since you cannot by definition shoot a shot as an in-bounds pass (ie. on an inbounds pass, even if the ball goes in the hoop it cannot count since it cannot be a legal shot) then you also cannot by definition goal-tend an inbounds pass.  That is, all of the rules regarding what you can and can't do to interfere or assist with a shot do not apply.  It only becomes a "shot" when Chandler touches it, and at that point it is HIS shot.  I don't really see a reason to change that regulation since it's not hard at all to defend against that play as long as the players understand what the rules are.


This. It's a brilliant play that will work once every great while.
 
2017-12-28 11:13:08 AM  

raukos7: IlGreven: smd31: Read the little blurb by the coach and saw the replay of it and congrats to the coach (and players).  I'm guessing that the rule book will be changed next year though.

As long as the ball never touched the rim or the backboard before Chandler caught it, and as long as Chandler caught it outside the cylinder, I have no problem with that play.

I can only find a copy of the 2014 rules, and I can't imagine that the rules regarding interference have changed much. There's basically 3 relevant parts to the interference rule:
A player shall not:
a. Touch the ball or the basket ring when the ball is using the basket ring as its lower base or hang on the rim while the ball is passing through.
EXCEPTION: If a player near his own basket has his hand legally in contact with the ball, it is not a  violation if his contact with the ball continues after the ball enters the cylinder, or if, in such action, he touches the basket.
b. Touch any ball from within the playing area when it is above the basket ring and within the imaginary cylinder.
f. Touch any ball from within the playing area that is on its downward flight with an opportunity to score. This is considered to be a "field goal attempt" or trying for a goal.

According to part b of the rule that should not be called basket interference because the ball didn't come from within the playing area (although the playing area doesn't seem to be strictly defined in the rule book - it could conceivably include some out of bounds area and if it did then it would be interference). Part f doesn't apply, because of the chance to score requirement. However, part a would still apply if you consider the ball to be on the rim - essentially you have to treat an inbounds pass as a rebound and can't pull it off the rim to prevent a violation. It's probably a stretch to consider that ball on the rim though, it certainly wasn't sitting on the rim.


Yes, but from the inbounds rules, the ball can't touch the rim or the backboard anyway. If it touched either, then it's Memphis' ball from the inbounds spot. But if it didn't do either and GT or BI doesn't apply, then again, no problems.
 
2017-12-28 11:27:08 AM  
This is all the Patriots fault
 
2017-12-28 12:01:54 PM  

IlGreven: raukos7: IlGreven: smd31: Read the little blurb by the coach and saw the replay of it and congrats to the coach (and players).  I'm guessing that the rule book will be changed next year though.

As long as the ball never touched the rim or the backboard before Chandler caught it, and as long as Chandler caught it outside the cylinder, I have no problem with that play.

I can only find a copy of the 2014 rules, and I can't imagine that the rules regarding interference have changed much. There's basically 3 relevant parts to the interference rule:
A player shall not:
a. Touch the ball or the basket ring when the ball is using the basket ring as its lower base or hang on the rim while the ball is passing through.
EXCEPTION: If a player near his own basket has his hand legally in contact with the ball, it is not a  violation if his contact with the ball continues after the ball enters the cylinder, or if, in such action, he touches the basket.
b. Touch any ball from within the playing area when it is above the basket ring and within the imaginary cylinder.
f. Touch any ball from within the playing area that is on its downward flight with an opportunity to score. This is considered to be a "field goal attempt" or trying for a goal.

According to part b of the rule that should not be called basket interference because the ball didn't come from within the playing area (although the playing area doesn't seem to be strictly defined in the rule book - it could conceivably include some out of bounds area and if it did then it would be interference). Part f doesn't apply, because of the chance to score requirement. However, part a would still apply if you consider the ball to be on the rim - essentially you have to treat an inbounds pass as a rebound and can't pull it off the rim to prevent a violation. It's probably a stretch to consider that ball on the rim though, it certainly wasn't sitting on the rim.

Yes, but from the inbounds rules, the ball can't touch the rim or the b ...


I had to look for a while. The inbounds rules state that the ball can't touch anything above the playing surface, but that appears to only apply to items like the scoreboard. Most of the backboard and rim are in bounds. The only exception to that is the back side of the backboard (also, the supports are always out of bounds). It's not easy to find samples of it since it's so rarely an issue, but here's an older example
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NaTKP​e​XgRdc
 
2017-12-28 12:53:33 PM  
It's just an alley-oop.
 
2017-12-28 02:41:34 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: It's just an alley-oop.


sports.cbsimg.netView Full Size
 
Displayed 12 of 12 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report