The "foul every possession because they can't call them all" scheme

[UglyBugBall]

You got to keep your trolling at least a bit believable, man, this is way too obvious.

That's not a troll, by your logic we should call fouls on Iverson guarding prime Shaq. Do you see the problem there? Yeah Caruso is not that small, but compared to Jokic he's a ragdoll.

A foul is a foul though... A height differential shouldn't change the definition of a foul, that's just absolute nonsense.

Sure, "a foul is a foul" in theory but in practice, refs aren’t there to just enforce the rulebook like robots or we'd have fouls being called all game long. They’re there to help keep the game fair and competitive. If one guy already has a massive physical advantage, calling every foul just makes it more unfair. It’s like having a tank run over a Lada and then giving the tank even more help, that’s not good for the game. You want balance so the game stays interesting and watchable, not a mismatch made worse by ticky-tack calls.

[nikster]

Jokic has like half a foot and 100 pounds on on Caruso. Why the hell would you call fouls on him? How is he supposed to defend that? Jokic should play through it. When I'm playing my 10 year old cousin do I call fouls? Hell no, because he's literally half my size.

Caruso defending other guards and wings, sure call the fouls. But you can't be serious and hold him to the same standard if he's defending a 7 foot 300 pound center. Use some judgement. That's why we have refs so they can use their judgement.

are you serious? He's not supposed to, that's the point. That would ordinarily be a horrible strategy to employ because Jokic would score at will or force help defenders so he could find open shooters. It only works because they allowed Caruso to maul Jokic.

Ok, but you’re actually proving my point, you’re saying it would be a horrible strategy because Jokic would dominate him. Exactly. So on top of Jokic already having a massive physical advantage, now we’re supposed to expect the refs to bail him out too? Of course Caruso will have to “foul” just to have a shot, but even then, a real center would still be more effective defending Jokic without fouling, because Jokic can easily play through smaller defenders. It’s like if a 10-year-old fouls me, I’m still going through him with no problem. The real issue is Jokic kept posting up too high, instead of sealing deep where he could’ve easily punished Caruso, fouls or not.

It should be called because its illegal. Fouls are not a way to make up for physical deficits. I don't know how you can consider calling the rules as they are written a "bail out". does this handicap just extend to height? Should a skinny centre like Chet be allowed to hack at Jokic? What if someone is big but just generally uncoordinated?

[davidv2001]

The fact that some fans think a small guard like Alex Caruso should be allowed to foul a seven footer like Nikola Jokic because he’s undersized is crazy. Alex Caruso is too short and small to guard a big man like Jokic legally. He doesn’t get to break the rules to make the matchup competitive.

It’s similar to the nonsense that often occurred when Yao Ming played and teams constantly fronted him with smaller players.

[UglyBugBall]

are you serious? He's not supposed to, that's the point. That would ordinarily be a horrible strategy to employ because Jokic would score at will or force help defenders so he could find open shooters. It only works because they allowed Caruso to maul Jokic.

Ok, but you’re actually proving my point, you’re saying it would be a horrible strategy because Jokic would dominate him. Exactly. So on top of Jokic already having a massive physical advantage, now we’re supposed to expect the refs to bail him out too? Of course Caruso will have to “foul” just to have a shot, but even then, a real center would still be more effective defending Jokic without fouling, because Jokic can easily play through smaller defenders. It’s like if a 10-year-old fouls me, I’m still going through him with no problem. The real issue is Jokic kept posting up too high, instead of sealing deep where he could’ve easily punished Caruso, fouls or not.

It should be called because its illegal. Fouls are not a way to make up for physical deficits. I don't know how you can consider calling the rules as they are written a "bail out". does this handicap just extend to height? Should a skinny centre like Chet be allowed to hack at Jokic? What if someone is big but just generally uncoordinated?

That’s like saying a cop should treat a struggling single mom stealing baby formula the exact same as some junkie stealing chips and chocolate for kicks. Yeah, the law’s the same, but in real life, people use judgment all the time. Same thing here. Refs aren’t robots, they see when a guy is outsized and just trying to compete, and they’re not gonna call every little thing the same way they would if it was two equal matchups.

[nikster]

Ok, but you’re actually proving my point, you’re saying it would be a horrible strategy because Jokic would dominate him. Exactly. So on top of Jokic already having a massive physical advantage, now we’re supposed to expect the refs to bail him out too? Of course Caruso will have to “foul” just to have a shot, but even then, a real center would still be more effective defending Jokic without fouling, because Jokic can easily play through smaller defenders. It’s like if a 10-year-old fouls me, I’m still going through him with no problem. The real issue is Jokic kept posting up too high, instead of sealing deep where he could’ve easily punished Caruso, fouls or not.

It should be called because its illegal. Fouls are not a way to make up for physical deficits. I don't know how you can consider calling the rules as they are written a "bail out". does this handicap just extend to height? Should a skinny centre like Chet be allowed to hack at Jokic? What if someone is big but just generally uncoordinated?

That’s like saying a cop should treat a struggling single mom stealing baby formula the exact same as some junkie stealing chips and chocolate for kicks. Yeah, the law’s the same, but in real life, people use judgment all the time. Same thing here. Refs aren’t robots, they see when a guy is outsized and just trying to compete, and they’re not gonna call every little thing the same way they would if it was two equal matchups.

It's nothing like that lol, These are professional athletes not babies and toddlers. The Thunder chose to put Caruso on him to put their rim protectors in a better position and alow them to play faster. They have 2 7 footers they could have put on him.

Should Jokic be able to grab and hold faster players on the perimeter? Should Chet be able to foul because he is so much smaller then Jokic?

[Bergmaniac]

That's not a troll, by your logic we should call fouls on Iverson guarding prime Shaq. Do you see the problem there? Yeah Caruso is not that small, but compared to Jokic he's a ragdoll.

A foul is a foul though... A height differential shouldn't change the definition of a foul, that's just absolute nonsense.

Sure, "a foul is a foul" in theory but in practice, refs aren’t there to just enforce the rulebook like robots or we'd have fouls being called all game long. They’re there to help keep the game fair and competitive. If one guy already has a massive physical advantage, calling every foul just makes it more unfair. It’s like having a tank run over a Lada and then giving the tank even more help, that’s not good for the game. You want balance so the game stays interesting and watchable, not a mismatch made worse by ticky-tack calls.

By the same logic slower players should be allowed to just hold the shirt of the quicker ones to prevent getting beat when defending. After all, it's not fair that someone like Maxey can just blow by any big, so the bigs should be allowed to hold his jersey on his drives.

[WolfAddict]

That's not a troll, by your logic we should call fouls on Iverson guarding prime Shaq. Do you see the problem there? Yeah Caruso is not that small, but compared to Jokic he's a ragdoll.

A foul is a foul though... A height differential shouldn't change the definition of a foul, that's just absolute nonsense.

Sure, "a foul is a foul" in theory but in practice, refs aren’t there to just enforce the rulebook like robots or we'd have fouls being called all game long. They’re there to help keep the game fair and competitive. If one guy already has a massive physical advantage, calling every foul just makes it more unfair. It’s like having a tank run over a Lada and then giving the tank even more help, that’s not good for the game. You want balance so the game stays interesting and watchable, not a mismatch made worse by ticky-tack calls.

But this is the exact reason offences are set up to get a mismatch on the defensive side... Get a smaller defender in the post with a big so they either have to send help or get scored on

Have you EVER played a game of basketball?

[GoBobs]

The league should make an effort to apply the rules equally to every player. If some guys on the Thunder are getting away with more handchecking than other guys in the league by spamming that constantly, the league should do something.

They are kind of build for it really though. Even if Dort and Caruso get in foul trouble they are super deep. Still, Indy took them to the wire and injury was a factor. Denver would have beaten them if they had any depth at all, but they were playing like 5 guys.

[Zadeh]

Some people cry about the lack of physicality in the league and then cry when a team is allowed to be physical and gets the title. Did no other team see what OKC was doing all season? Why can't they replicate it? Could it be because they're not savvy enough? The mental gymnastics have gone so far that we have folks arguing with a straight face that the team in the smallest market in the league is the league's "darling" or whatever. Ridiculous.

Make up your mind. Do you want this or not? All OKC does is handcheck, play body-to-body, and intercept. They're very good at it, so they get the benefit of the doubt sometimes.

Really??????

Did you ever watch any games of Thunder ? I never ever seen a team get whistle for faul that easily. Referees let one team to play physical, but dont let the other team to be physical.

This league is softer than any other basketbol league in the world. I want more physical games, but not for one team for every team.

Did you watch the actual finals? Both teams were physical as hell...this nonsense has to stop.

No I didn't ,after hear Foster was not the referee of game seven, I started to watch till Haliburton injury, then give up. I dont want to watch predetermined games.

The whole "You are not allowed to breath on SGA" claim is very much not true for most of the playoffs. Yes, there were some games he got a very good whistle, but far from most of them if you are remotely objective. In the Finals Neimhardt was allowed to be very physical with him. In Game 4, the one people kept whining that Foster fixed it for OKC, he shot 2 FTs in the first 44 minutes despite driving all the time.

And frankly, if a team as talented as the Thunder was actually allowed to "wrestle their opponents" without a whistle on defence while their superstar is getting fouls for every minor touch, or anything close to this, they would have needed 7 games to beat Denver and Indiana, both series would have been sweeps.

"Yes, there were some games he got a very good whistle" this is play-off, one or two game in any series gives enough advantages. How many games do you need to accept they are cheap faul ?

[dhsilv2]

Really??????

Did you ever watch any games of Thunder ? I never ever seen a team get whistle for faul that easily. Referees let one team to play physical, but dont let the other team to be physical.

This league is softer than any other basketbol league in the world. I want more physical games, but not for one team for every team.

Did you watch the actual finals? Both teams were physical as hell...this nonsense has to stop.

No I didn't ,after hear Foster was not the referee of game seven, I started to watch till Haliburton injury, then give up. I dont want to watch predetermined games.

The whole "You are not allowed to breath on SGA" claim is very much not true for most of the playoffs. Yes, there were some games he got a very good whistle, but far from most of them if you are remotely objective. In the Finals Neimhardt was allowed to be very physical with him. In Game 4, the one people kept whining that Foster fixed it for OKC, he shot 2 FTs in the first 44 minutes despite driving all the time.

And frankly, if a team as talented as the Thunder was actually allowed to "wrestle their opponents" without a whistle on defence while their superstar is getting fouls for every minor touch, or anything close to this, they would have needed 7 games to beat Denver and Indiana, both series would have been sweeps.

"Yes, there were some games he got a very good whistle" this is play-off, one or two game in any series gives enough advantages. How many games do you need to accept they are cheap faul ?

What color tinfoil goes best with a suit? Asking for a friend.