Should the NBA throw out the clear path rules?

[YogurtProducer]

That's not where the foul occurred though. Lillard fouled when Ross (?) was still behind him.

My question is no matter where the foul happened, the Raptors had a man down court wide open, shouldn't that be "clear path" right away? If there is to be a rule change that should be it.

It should be clear path either way but the worst part is that they gave the Blazers a clear path on the exact same play. If Blazers don't get the clear path foul I say okay bad calls happen but they were fair about it. This way there is absolutely no excuse for it.

Bottomline there never should've been a Clear Path controversy anyway had the ref called a foul on Lowry when he hip checked Blake going for a loose ball with like 17 seconds left in regulation (not to mention on the side-view replay it looked like Lowry might've been the last to touch the ball also).

The Lowry tackle at least wasn't reviewable, it was just a blown call.. But if you get a chance to look at replay and screw it up on two different occasions minutes a part that's a little bit more annoying... (As far as I can tell from the thread of the raps board with the rule definition they were both wrong calls).

Like I've said before the Raps didn't deserve to win anyways, but us getting 2 FTs and possession instead of Portland getting 2FTs and possession is quite the swing.

[dozendonuts]

It wasn't the same play at all. When Lillard fouled Ross he was in front of Ross. When Batum got fouled, he was already ahead of the defender when contact occurred.

Also, that play resulted in one point getting scored (Batum hit one ft, the Blazers didn't score on the possession) so let's not act like one point is the reason Toronto lost.

Lillard wasn't in front of Ross. That's a clear path foul I know you'll never accept it cause you're a Blazers fan but that's what it is. And if it was called correctly Raps would've had a chance to tie and if not it's still a one possession game.

[Norm2953]

Amazing the amount of angst from the Raptors fans. It was an ugly game with refs who seemed indecisive. Focus on
the next game with GS who only have the best record in the league.

[CB-Blazer]

If we got rid of all the rules that have lost the Raptors games (according to some of their fans), there wouldn't be any.

I don't think it's a perfect rule, it needs to be better defined and called on a more consistent basis.

[CB-Blazer]

If we got rid of all the rules that have lost the Raptors games (according to some of their fans), there wouldn't be any.

I don't think it's a perfect rule, it needs to be better defined and called on a more consistent basis.

[knickerbocker2k2]

They need to reworded or redefine it. You have to ask what is the intent of the rule? The whole purpose of the rule is to prevent teams fouling on purpose to prevent easy fast break points.

Lillard clearly fouled Ross with the intention stopping Ross (or Lowry) from getting two easy points. Vasquez fouled Batum because the shot clock was off and they needed to foul. If Batum has any brain cells there is no way he tries to outrun Ross if he was not fouled.

I'm not even going to debate if the refs made the right call. The spirit of the rule was not observed in the two scenarios.

[atlantabbq99]

Think of all the great dunks we got to see because players aren't grabbing the offensive player on a fast break.

The clear path rule is not to allow free throws and possession to the team, but it is to allow highlight dunks

[UnbelievablyRAW]

I don't really care about those

As this thread was clearly made in response to the Blazer game, I'm more baffled at the no calls Lowry was getting down the stretch and all through overtime

Supposedly zero contact on every drive attempt he made

[Huskies1947]

I just dont understand why the team that gets fouled on the clear path gets two points and the ball again. Juat give em two points and call it a day

Sent from my SGH-I337M using RealGM Forums mobile app

[Run PDX]

It's like offside calls in soccer. Sometimes the angles just aren't perfect for refs - or video - and there needs to be a little bit of interpretation to make the call.

[DaVoiceMaster]

Lillard wasn't in front of Ross. That's a clear path foul I know you'll never accept it cause you're a Blazers fan but that's what it is. And if it was called correctly Raps would've had a chance to tie and if not it's still a one possession game.

Kind of like I know you'll never accept it cause you're a Raptors fan???

Raptor fans are hung up on when the whistle was blown, not when the actual foul occurred. Initially Lillard was ahead of the Raptor player and that was when the foul occurred, not once the Raptor player moved ahead of Lillard. In the other case, Batum was always ahead of Vasquez so there is no doubt, even with Ross coming up in the middle of the court. He was not there yet when the foul occurred.

All of this crying about the ref's screwing the Raptors is bogus. You can go through that game and find just as many poor calls against the Blazers. The Blazers pulled it out. It happens in every game, but typically by the end of the game, the poor calls have evened out. This was just a great, frustrating game to watch with some serous intensity down the stretch. The Raptors were better than I thought and can see them making a run at the title. Congratulations!

[irie]

Regardless of the calls and whether they were right or wrong, no way should the NBA get rid of clear path fouls.

[Moose10Fan]

Lillard wasn't in front of Ross. That's a clear path foul I know you'll never accept it cause you're a Blazers fan but that's what it is. And if it was called correctly Raps would've had a chance to tie and if not it's still a one possession game.

Kind of like I know you'll never accept it cause you're a Raptors fan???

Raptor fans are hung up on when the whistle was blown, not when the actual foul occurred. Initially Lillard was ahead of the Raptor player and that was when the foul occurred, not once the Raptor player moved ahead of Lillard. In the other case, Batum was always ahead of Vasquez so there is no doubt, even with Ross coming up in the middle of the court. He was not there yet when the foul occurred.

All of this crying about the ref's screwing the Raptors is bogus. You can go through that game and find just as many poor calls against the Blazers. The Blazers pulled it out. It happens in every game, but typically by the end of the game, the poor calls have evened out. This was just a great, frustrating game to watch with some serous intensity down the stretch. The Raptors were better than I thought and can see them making a run at the title. Congratulations!

Rap's fans will always have the officials to fall back on, its there scapegoat.

[irie]

the foul discrepancy is only at 4 in Blazers favor. I was expecting a 10+ in Blazers favor before the game starts.

Home teams getting calls is an NBA norm, especially for a storied franchise like Portland, you might have just gotten accustomed to the way the Blazers got officiated so you don't notice it any more.

It is a fact that refs like to screw over the Raps, since they face less criticism from American media if they do that.

...

And of course the Rockets fans were ready to riot over the refs issues, but that is just Rockets fans being Rockets fans.

Please, tell us more about these ridiculous Rockets fans who riot over refs every game.

[Scalabrine]

Does anyone else realize that the poll question is written completely wrong?

"Q: Should the NBA throw out the clear path rules? A: Yes, They work fine. No, Theyre trash. If they work fine then they shouldnt be thrown out and if they are trash then they should be...

As for my feeling on that Batum foul (which is clearly why you made this thread). I think it should have been a clear path foul. Not because Batum was behind Ross but because another Raptor (I think it was Lowry) was under the hoop on the other side of the court WIDE open, no one even on that side from the Blazers and Ross was about to pass it up court to him but he got fouled. The foul took an easy and obvious fastbreak 2 points from the Raps and I am pretty sure I have seen that called that way before.

I remember when the fastbreak rule was put into effect and I think it made the game much cleaner. Running up behind someone with the sole purpose of fouling and stopping the break was really lame and dangerous. I think 2 shots and the ball is also a fair penalty for doing it. Extreme penalties will make people not do certain things. Just 2 shots makes it still a good play depending on the player.

[nicnac215]

instead of 2 shots and the ball they should change it to 3 shots only.

[almatic]

For god sakes

- The Blazers player who committed the foul on Terrence Ross was in between Ross and the hoop ( Not a clear path foul)
- Grevis Vasquez was not inbetween Nic Batum and the basket when he committed the foul (Is a clear path foul)

I'm not sure where all this complaining is coming from, both fouls were different and were called correctly.

Neither of these were that clear. Vasquez had his back to the basket & ran up & MET Baturm for the foul.... not any more clear than when Lillard fouled.
And Kyle Lowry was WAY ahead of Ross & Lillard at the time of foul, he stopped that pass. That's part of the play.. that should be a clear path foul.

[Deadpool Raptor]

I've always thought 2 FT"s and the ball was excessive.

Maybe just give 2 free throws.

I was thinking 1 free throw and the ball. It makes the most sense because people miss layups all the time, and 2 ft + ball is really excessive because it could be up to a 6 point play.

[Lord Eder]

I don't really want to get into it too much, but throwing out the rule all together is a ridiculous statement. What I do think needs to be done is the way the rule is written needs to be revisited.

As has been mentioned multiple times, the point of the rule is to stop teams from fouling to prevent opposing teams from scoring easy baskets on fastbreak outs. The instance in which Ross was fouled was a clear example of this. Ross with a full head of steam down the wing and Kyle Lowry right under the basket is going to end up in a guaranteed 2 points for Toronto one way or the other, and thus the Blazers should've been penalized in the way that the rule was set out to do. However, in it's wording, Damien Lillard fouls Terrence Ross while he is still ahead of Ross, albeit barely, and in-between the tip-off circle and the basket. As per the law, they got the call right, but as per the situation and the reason that law was put in place in the first place, it was the wrong call.

The Vasquez-Batum play is where they just flat out made the wrong call. If defending players are in the front court at any time before the foul is committed then no clear path can be awarded. This is something that was implemented prior to last season. Both Terrence Ross and Greivis Vasquez were in the front court before the foul occurred. This makes it irrelevant that Vasquez reached around to foul and ultimately was behind Nic Batum and the basket. Batum would've had to go 1 on 2 had the foul not occurred, there was no guaranteed easy basket there that the Raptors should've been penalized for intentionally stopping. All that aside though, again, given the situation, the basketball situation, this one should not have been a clear path foul. Vasquez is fouling to stop the clock in that situation.

To me, it's just unfortunate. You can argue that the referees applied the rules as they are worded out. But the unfortunate part for me is that both plays pretty much resulted in the exact opposite result of what the rule was put in place for. One team had a chance at an easy bucket, ultimately via a 2 on 0 or 2 on 1 at the least and was not awarded the clear path foul. The other team had 2 guys backpedaling in the front court to be able to defend and contest a shot on a 1 on 2 break and are penalized with a clear path foul.

[whysoserious]

I just dont understand why the team that gets fouled on the clear path gets two points and the ball again. Juat give em two points and call it a day

Sent from my SGH-I337M using RealGM Forums mobile app

That's not a punishment. Otherwise teams would foul on purpose and hope for guys to miss a FT giving the defensive team a slight advantage over the long-haul on that call. The punishment is that if you define it as a clear path, then the offensive player would have likely scored 2 points easily and the punishment for preventing that easy basket is to award a chance at the two points but give the offensive team the ball and an extra possession.

It's more than fair just clear up the definition maybe but there's nothing wrong with the result when it is called.