- 2,612
- 10
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2007
Not in every case, no.
Official 2008 NBA Finals Game 2 Thread: Lakers @ Boston 6/8 6PM PST Game On ABC HD
- Thread in 'Sports & Training' Thread starter Started by kidskillz858,
- Start date
Not in every case, no.
- 4,759
- 626
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2006
Originally Posted by 59 Piffy
faker fans complaining about the refs
oh the irony
i love it
- 2,223
- 11
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2005
Originally Posted by 23ska909red02
O.K., so even if a person hasn't played organized ball, they can still have a very valid opinion on officiating. Someone who has played organized ball does NOT have a more valid opinion than someone who hasn't.Originally Posted by jefffort5
thats def not a translation for that...
Would you agree with that statement?
you know what...idk....but if you played ball...you know from jump...ur number one complain isnt going to be officiating
- 4,759
- 626
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2006
nycknicks,
If you are saying with a serious face that refs had nothing to do with tonights game then you need to step off the keyboard for a moment. Lakers shot 27 shotsin the paint, Boston shot 20 shots in the paint; Boston had 38 freethrows, Lakers had 10 freethrows. The getting to the paint arguement is not going to holdup. Furthermore the Lakers outscored the Celtics in the paint. Boston had 37 rebounds to LA's 36 rebounds, so please don't try to go there.
The game was decided by the freethrow differential. Simple as that. Listen to the radio right now or go watch the post game again, everyone admits it.
If you are saying with a serious face that refs had nothing to do with tonights game then you need to step off the keyboard for a moment. Lakers shot 27 shotsin the paint, Boston shot 20 shots in the paint; Boston had 38 freethrows, Lakers had 10 freethrows. The getting to the paint arguement is not going to holdup. Furthermore the Lakers outscored the Celtics in the paint. Boston had 37 rebounds to LA's 36 rebounds, so please don't try to go there.
The game was decided by the freethrow differential. Simple as that. Listen to the radio right now or go watch the post game again, everyone admits it.
- 8,025
- 216
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2001
Okay. I see. I had a hard time translating your bad grammar.
"you know you officials win/lose a game for you"
?
Anyways, I'm out.
"you know you officials win/lose a game for you"
?
Anyways, I'm out.
darthska
Staff member
- 46,096
- 30,276
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2004
If you played ball?Originally Posted by jefffort5
Originally Posted by 23ska909red02
O.K., so even if a person hasn't played organized ball, they can still have a very valid opinion on officiating. Someone who has played organized ball does NOT have a more valid opinion than someone who hasn't.Originally Posted by jefffort5
thats def not a translation for that...
Would you agree with that statement?
you know what...idk....but if you played ball...you know from jump...ur number one complain isnt going to be officiating
But that's exactly the question: what if a person didn't? Is their opinion less valid because they didn't play?
So far, all you're doing is showing that you think a person's opinion is invalid if they didn't play ball, but you don't want to just go aheadand say 'Yes, a person's opinion is invalid if they haven't actually played.'
If that's an incorrect assumption on my part, then... again...
(it's not a hard question)
Even if a person hasn't played organized ball, they can still have a very valid opinion on officiating. Someone who has played organized ball does NOT havea more valid opinion than someone who hasn't.
Would you agree with that statement?
It really shouldn't be that hard to answer with one of these two:
- "Yes, I agree with that statement. Someone who hasn't played organized ball has just as valid an opinion as someone who has."
- "No, I disagree with that statement. Someone who has played organized ball has a more valid opinion than someone who hasn't."
- 2,223
- 11
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2005
it shouldn't of took that long to see what i was saying...this is a message board..you ppl take that bad grammar thing too far..like im actuallyspeaking...im typing on a damn keyboard...
- 2,223
- 11
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2005
invalid and having a more valid opinion are two diff things...so let me put it like this.....honestly...i do believe that ppl who have playedorganized ball have a more valid opinion about refs...because they actually played with them..its like speaking on something you've never experiencedb4....Originally Posted by 23ska909red02
If you played ball?Originally Posted by jefffort5
Originally Posted by 23ska909red02
O.K., so even if a person hasn't played organized ball, they can still have a very valid opinion on officiating. Someone who has played organized ball does NOT have a more valid opinion than someone who hasn't.Originally Posted by jefffort5
thats def not a translation for that...
Would you agree with that statement?
you know what...idk....but if you played ball...you know from jump...ur number one complain isnt going to be officiating
But that's exactly the question: what if a person didn't? Is their opinion less valid because they didn't play?
So far, all you're doing is showing that you think a person's opinion is invalid if they didn't play ball, but you don't want to just go ahead and say 'Yes, a person's opinion is invalid if they haven't actually played.'
If that's an incorrect assumption on my part, then... again...
(it's not a hard question)
Even if a person hasn't played organized ball, they can still have a very valid opinion on officiating. Someone who has played organized ball does NOT have a more valid opinion than someone who hasn't.
Would you agree with that statement?
It really shouldn't be that hard to answer with one of these two:
- "Yes, I agree with that statement. Someone who hasn't played organized ball has just as valid an opinion as someone who has."
- "No, I disagree with that statement. Someone who has played organized ball has a more valid opinion than someone who hasn't."
- 88,642
- 47,792
- Joined
- Feb 29, 2000
- 527
- 10
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2003
The bottom line is that you guys played them 4 times this season and have lost every time. Face it, they are the best team in the league. They have been allseason. The sad thing is that they had the best record in the league, have homecourt advantage, and opened the series as 2 to 1 dogs.
- 692
- 10
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2007
2 more to go. celtics mavs fan here its far from over.
darthska
Staff member
- 46,096
- 30,276
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2004
jefffort5:
invalid and having a more valid opinion are two diff things...so let me put it like this.....honestly...i do believe that ppl who have played organized ball have a more valid opinion about refs...because they actually played with them..its like speaking on something you've never experienced b4....
Alright then.
You think a person who has never played organized ball has a less valid opinion than someone who has played organized ball.
Now like I said, with that brilliant logic, the only people that should have a right to vote for President should be people who have been President (becausethose who haven't been President have a less valid opinion, because they've never experienced it before).
The reason that's ridiculous is the same reason your assertion is ridiculous: analysis can come from anyone, and I'll be damned if some no-name, 13thman on some NCCAA Division III school that gets blown out by 20 every night is supposed to have a more valid opinion than mine, just because he's on anorganized team. The fact that he has a uniform doesn't automatically mean his opinion is more valid; he can prove to know more about the game, but to justautomatically say 'Yep, his opinion is more valid than yours because he plays on a team' is ridiculous.
Barack 0drama:
Lakers bodyguards in here...
Checking in.
- 1,092
- 10
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2004
Originally Posted by Barack 0drama
Lakers bodyguards in here...
Chiiiiil, you cool people. I ain't tryna hear that from you.
- 4,371
- 352
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2004
im so happy. 2 more wins. laker fans always coming up with excuses. celts in 5
- 3,511
- 418
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2007
kobe's not going anywhere without a ring.
this game was ridiculous.
my heart was racing at the end unbelievable.
I KNEW SASHA HIT THAT 3. good d pierce.
refs save the day again by letting pierce throw himself into the lane and giving him a foul. refs were horrible all GAME. but like it has been stated horribleeffort by lakers. you aint getting calls and you gonna cry about it? you in the got damn nba, man up go hard to the rim take the contact and control the gameyourself. the refs cant stop u from putting the ball into the bucket.
lakers in 6.
yes in 6.
p.s. lakers relax.
can we get a pic of gasol giving k.g. the business?
this game was ridiculous.
my heart was racing at the end unbelievable.
I KNEW SASHA HIT THAT 3. good d pierce.
refs save the day again by letting pierce throw himself into the lane and giving him a foul. refs were horrible all GAME. but like it has been stated horribleeffort by lakers. you aint getting calls and you gonna cry about it? you in the got damn nba, man up go hard to the rim take the contact and control the gameyourself. the refs cant stop u from putting the ball into the bucket.
lakers in 6.
yes in 6.
p.s. lakers relax.
can we get a pic of gasol giving k.g. the business?
- 2,223
- 11
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2005
Alright then.
You think a person who has never played organized ball has a less valid opinion than someone who has played organized ball.
Now like I said, with that brilliant logic, the only people that should have a right to vote for President should be people who have been President (because those who haven't been President have a less valid opinion, because they've never experienced it before).
The reason that's ridiculous is the same reason your assertion is ridiculous: analysis can come from anyone, and I'll be damned if some no-name, 13th man on some NCCAA Division III school that gets blown out by 20 every night is supposed to have a more valid opinion than mine, just because he's on an organized team. The fact that he has a uniform doesn't automatically mean his opinion is more valid; he can prove to know more about the game, but to just automatically say 'Yep, his opinion is more valid than yours because he plays on a team' is ridiculous.
Barack 0drama:
Lakers bodyguards in here...
Checking in.
first off..terrible analogy..second off..the opinion about officiating...yes..def more valid..because he's actually played with REFEREE'S....imsimple logic..i dont even wanna go into it
so sitting up there calling a game..is two commentators who've never played the game of basetball b4 and one who has...who are you gonna listen tomore??
thats like taking ernie's opinion over kenny and charles...that dumb
- 6,823
- 10
- Joined
- May 25, 2003
Boston enjoyed a huge free-throw advantage, going 27-for-38 from the foul line, while the Lakers were just 10-for-10.
The whistles were one-sided.
"I didn't notice," Bryant said, cracking a smile.
KOBE KNOW!
The whistles were one-sided.
"I didn't notice," Bryant said, cracking a smile.
KOBE KNOW!
- 2,223
- 11
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2005
Originally Posted by TBONE95860
Boston enjoyed a huge free-throw advantage, going 27-for-38 from the foul line, while the Lakers were just 10-for-10.
The whistles were one-sided.
"I didn't notice," Bryant said, cracking a smile.
KOBE KNOW!
same as after the spurs game....when they asked kobe was it a foul..." naw...its want a foul"
- 20,261
- 2,188
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2006
- 489
- 10
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2007
Lakers are done. We'll be stronger next season, then we'll see!
- 4,371
- 352
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2004
stop f-ing crying about the refs. if anyone saw the game the lakers hardly drove to the basket. they werent aggresive and thats why they didnt shoot many freethrows
- 6,823
- 10
- Joined
- May 25, 2003
Originally Posted by jefffort5
Originally Posted by TBONE95860
Boston enjoyed a huge free-throw advantage, going 27-for-38 from the foul line, while the Lakers were just 10-for-10.
The whistles were one-sided.
"I didn't notice," Bryant said, cracking a smile.
KOBE KNOW!
same as after the spurs game....when they asked kobe was it a foul..." naw...its want a foul"
What... Fisher vs Barry?
That wasn't a foul.....
Barry's ******ed for coming down with the ball. As soon as you come down & dribble that ball.... no foul. If he wanted the foul heshould have shot the 3 in the air. Too bad for Barry he didn't.
darthska
Staff member
- 46,096
- 30,276
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2004
- 2,223
- 11
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2005
if both of them is there...talking about officiating...all day im going to take heed to charles opinion more that ernie's....whicheva one u feel is correctis up to you...but thats how i feel about.....thats how u feel..if you think its flawed logic...ok then...
- 2,223
- 11
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2005
Originally Posted by TBONE95860
Originally Posted by jefffort5
Originally Posted by TBONE95860
Boston enjoyed a huge free-throw advantage, going 27-for-38 from the foul line, while the Lakers were just 10-for-10.
The whistles were one-sided.
"I didn't notice," Bryant said, cracking a smile.
KOBE KNOW!
same as after the spurs game....when they asked kobe was it a foul..." naw...its want a foul"
What... Fisher vs Barry?
That wasn't a foul.....
Barry's ******ed for coming down with the ball. As soon as you come down & dribble that ball.... no foul. If he wanted the foul he should have shot the 3 in the air. Too bad for Barry he didn't.
if that wasn't a foul...we need to take back trillions of fouls that were given to kobe...
