# HUGE PLAY IN 6ers KNICKS!



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

.2 seconds left, Knicks inbounding, Mohamed goes back door on Dalembert, Penny throws a lob from out of bounds, Nazr jumps and dunks. 

The rule says under .3 you can only get a tip, but Nazr CLEARLY got it in as reviews show. Refs couldn't review due to the rule!


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

The refs couldn't review because the rule? I thought the rule was that they had to review the play in a situation like that...


I'd have to see this play to believe that somebody dunked a tip in .2 seconds, especially Nazr Mohammed, who an explosive leaper.


----------



## Jamel Irief (May 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>KokoTheMonkey</b>!
> The refs couldn't review because the rule? I thought the rule was that they had to review the play in a situation like that...
> 
> 
> I'd have to see this play to believe that somebody dunked a tip in .2 seconds, especially Nazr Mohammed, who an explosive leaper.


Dude, how long does it take a 6'11" guy to get from the ground to the rim? Especially considering he caught the ball mid flight.

The rule said no shot is good under .3 seconds unless its tipped, no matter what.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

Did the clock start as soon as he caught the ball?


----------



## PhillaBalla22 (Jun 19, 2003)

What a game, and Sammy Dalembert almost screwed us twice but we still got it thanks to the one and only: Kenny Thomas

KT's Stat Line:: 50 mins, 8-16 FG, 8-10 FT, 16 Reb, 5 blks, 25 points

Wow! Two shots to the tie the game. Also 1-1 3PT


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Jemel Irief</b>!
> 
> 
> Dude, how long does it take a 6'11" guy to get from the ground to the rim? Especially considering he caught the ball mid flight.
> ...



Probably longer than .2 seconds....


----------



## jawn100 (Jun 1, 2003)

yeah the replay would be meaningless in this situation. Anything caught under .3 doesn't count. If he caught it and dunked it in .00001 seconds it still wouldn't have counted cause its a catch. He actually did dunk it before the light went on but that is irrelavent. Good clear cut call by the refs, agonizing loss for the Knicks.


----------



## Rockstone (Jan 21, 2004)

There should be no sympathy because the Knicks should not have let it come to that.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

I saw this play on Sports Center, and :laugh: .



I understand it might be hard to start the clock at a milli-second, but you just can't simply catch the ball and dunk it in that amount of time.


----------



## Jmonty580 (Jun 20, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Rockstone</b>!
> There should be no sympathy because the Knicks should not have let it come to that.


Amen to that, they were winning by 14 and let the game slip away. Not only that but they were winning by three with like under 10 seconds left. We missed foul shots, and we just sucked. Horrible game for the Knicks and we derseved to lose. Pisses me off. My team may not even make the playoffs playing like this.


----------



## Fordy74 (May 22, 2002)

Broke my heart If only, they switched the plays we ran in regulation with .6 with that play with .2 it woulda counted. Both times Nazr came so close to winning the game at the buzzer. Heartbreaking loss. The Knicks need to shape up because Boston, Cleveland, Miami are hot and Philly gained ground tonight. Ugh..


----------



## RoyWilliams (May 25, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Fordy74</b>!
> The Knicks need to shape up because Boston, Cleveland, Miami are hot and Philly gained ground tonight. Ugh..


Thats 4 in a row for Philly.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

That would shock me if New York didn't make the playoffs after all of this. What's the deal?


----------



## John (Jun 9, 2002)

Some threads ago, people mention about good court vision here. Sorry if it is out of topic, but who was it Jemel mentioned the player threw the ball to??

Penny Hardaway, another unintentional mention of a great court vision player by Jemel.


----------



## Jmonty580 (Jun 20, 2003)

The Knicks flat out good defense, and they have scoring problems. With Marbury, Houston, Tim Thomas, and Kurt Thomas we go unbelievabe stretches without scoring.


----------



## jokeaward (May 22, 2003)

I dunno dude, the clock is run by a human, the refs are human, the dunk was close but disputable. Knicks don't need this one anyway. With 17 games left I doubt they'll move far from the 6th seed.


----------



## jawn100 (Jun 1, 2003)

^ That really has nothing to do with it. He DID dunk it before the light went on but that does not matter. It has to do with the rule(the Trent Tucker rule). As long as it is a catch, which it clearly was, and there is less than .3 it doesn't count. Its a pretty indisputable call if you ask me.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey (Aug 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>jawn100</b>!
> ^ That really has nothing to do with it. He DID dunk it before the light went on but that does not matter. It has to do with the rule(the Trent Tucker rule). As long as it is a catch, which it clearly was, and there is less than .3 it doesn't count. Its a pretty indisputable call if you ask me.



Yeah, I'm pretty damn sure you can't catch and dunk a ball in .2 seconds. Maybe a tip-in, but not a grab-and-dunk play.


----------



## jawn100 (Jun 1, 2003)

^ But even if he could and did catch and dunk it in .00001 seconds it would NOT have counted because of league rules. As long as it is a CATCH it does not count.


----------



## Bruno (Sep 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>jawn100</b>!
> ^ But even if he could and did catch and dunk it in .00001 seconds it would NOT have counted because of league rules. As long as it is a CATCH it does not count.


yeah , you are right . and the sixers win and the guilti isnt for the refs but for the rule . and about the knicks i dont know the reason for they having really goods players and a great coach and having losing their games .


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jawn100</b>!
> ^ But even if he could and did catch and dunk it in .00001 seconds it would NOT have counted because of league rules. As long as it is a CATCH it does not count.


The reason the rule is in place, is because the clock doesn't start until the ball contacts a player. It's impossible for a human hand to restart the clock exactly when a person touches it, so instead of going to replay, they know you can't catch it and put it back in that small amount of time so they just disallow it. I think it's a great rule.


----------



## Bruno (Sep 15, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>PhillyPhanatic</b>!
> 
> 
> The reason the rule is in place, is because the clock doesn't start until the ball contacts a player. It's impossible for a human hand to restart the clock exactly when a person touches it, so instead of going to replay, they know you can't catch it and put it back in that small amount of time so they just disallow it. I think it's a great rule.


agree too this rule because this make more easy the job of the refs.


----------

