Chris Bosh Moving Picks

Well this thread got real stupid, real quick. Would you guys please stop feeding the troll and just ignore him. It's obvious that Homer doesn't know jack about basketball and is just trying to stir the pot.
 
Long-term masterful troll effort is long-term and masterful.

Congrats, HomoerChumpless, you have totally crush-trolled this board for months. Epic win, brah. You have convinced even the veteran troll-sniffer-outers that you are truly a bigoted gay-hater.
*applause*
 
Quit feeding me.

This is like travelling or not travelling in the NBA.
The rule describes travelling, but the refs don't call it, much.

Refs call reaching in as a foul, especially during a shot, almost all the time. I'm not aware if reaching in is in the playbook. That's not my argument. My argument is: it's called almost all the time in the NBA. Especially during a shot.
 
announcers say it was a reach in foul to help people that dont understand the ref is calling a contact foul that impedes the players ability to dribble, pass, or shoot. homer you might want to learn the game a little.
 
if reaching in was a foul then you would only be able to make steals by jumping in front of a pass and you could never steal on the dribble.
 
So Foval21, why wasn't James called for impeding Durrant while he was in the process of shooting?

That foul is called almost all the time.... The impeding foul, as you call it. It's called almost all the time.. Why wasn't it called?

Why isn't there some replay for game changing plays? I mean, why waste replay time for 3s and last shots of halves if your goal isn't to call the game right?

This argument has gone full circle, and I'm bored with it.
 
Last edited:
A reach in foul of course refers to a player reaching in and making contact (although sometimes no contact is made and a foul is still called) It is stupid to say that reaching in is not a foul because you knew what he was referring to and are only making yourself look stupid by playing a stupid game of semantics.
 
Hey, I called the reach in foul wrong, supposedly. I don't mind admitting that.

If their only point is to clarify that I called the foul wrong, that still doesn't explain why James wasn't called for a foul against Durrant while he was in the process of shooting with less than 5 secs left. Still doesn't explain why these types of situations aren't covered in a sport that is already, IMO, suspect.
 
Last edited:
HomerChampless said:
Hey, I called the reach in foul wrong, supposedly. I don't mind admitting that.

If their only point is to clarify that I called the foul wrong, that still doesn't explain why James wasn't called for a foul against Durrant while he was in the process of shooting with less than 5 secs left. Still doesn't explain why these types of situations aren't covered in a sport that is already, IMO, suspect.
Click to expand...


You are still queer as ever today Homer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top