12/21/24
May 16, 2008
If you can't beat 'em, cheat 'em.: Seven time champion Robert Horry gives a do whatever it takes to win lesson to the Hornets, and extends his post-season record of cheap shots in the process.
posted by irunfromclones to basketball at 12:18 PM - 13 comments
That was a clean screen, not a cheap shot and certainly not cheating. The columnist seems to have an axe to grind with the Spurs.
posted by curlyelk at 03:40 PM on May 16, 2008
I dont know if I would say that the screen was "clean" but it was legal.Horry is to smart of a player to have this happen by accident. When this is all said and done this play may be what does the Spurs in, because if the Hornets decide to play a more physical game now they have the younger legs and i'm not sure if the Spurs can continue to play this many games at this tempo. Dont get me wrong, the Spurs are still the favorite to alot of people but you have to wonder what toll this seris has taken.
posted by jda at 04:21 PM on May 16, 2008
To lead with your shoulder to screen a player while he is in the air, a position where he is much less able to protect himself, isn't legal. Horry led with his shoulder, which should be a foul. I'm not sure to be honest, how anyone could think that this wasn't a foul. Someone help me understand how you can lead with your shoulder into somone's back while they are in a compromising position and that not be, at bare minimum, a foul.
posted by brainofdtrain at 07:10 PM on May 16, 2008
A couple more things. First, they did call an offensive foul on Horry, so yes it wasn't right. The case is closed on that one. Second, here is the rulebook regarding what consititutes a legal screen. From the NBA rule book: Section X—Screen A screen is the legal action of a player who, without causing undue contact, delays or prevents an opponent from reaching a desired position. Now, before all the homers come out to play, i know that this isn't always called as rigidly as the rule book calls for, but are you really going to tell me that this isn't crossing the line?
posted by brainofdtrain at 07:28 PM on May 16, 2008
When you have a couple hundred pounds flying into what you have staked as your space (and a tenth of a second to think about it), what are you supposed to lead with, your head? I think this was a proper screen being defended by its owner. Having said that, if I am completely wrong and this was an attempt by an athlete to take advantage of a known injury of an opponent, show me another physical team sport in which this doesn't happen. Some sports have specialists in this very notion. Doesn't make it right? Pity. If you have an ouchy, stay on the bench. If you have an ouchy big enough to make you writhe in pain if somebody bumps into it... Stay. On. The. Bench.
posted by bobfoot at 08:31 PM on May 16, 2008
what are you supposed to lead with, your head? Oddly enough, the picture you linked looks exactly like that.
posted by jmd82 at 10:30 PM on May 16, 2008
Truly odd - I linked no picture...
posted by bobfoot at 11:00 PM on May 16, 2008
Truly correct...It was brainofdtrain. My wires got crossed.
posted by jmd82 at 11:13 PM on May 16, 2008
When you have a couple hundred pounds flying into what you have staked as your space (and a tenth of a second to think about it), what are you supposed to lead with, your head? That's the point though bobfoot. Read the rule i pasted again. A screen isn't an agressive move. You aren't supposed to "lead" with anything. Period. In fact, following this rule of thumb, one can avoid hurting both themselves and other players, b/c you aren't go to try to screen someone in a position where either party is vulnerable, like the middle of one's back, for example. If a screen is performed legally, the only possible injury should come to the one performing the screen, in the case that the opposing player will run him/her over. I'm all for standing one's ground and in that sense, setting a hard screen, but "leading" or "leaning" into an opposing player is illegal.
posted by brainofdtrain at 12:11 AM on May 17, 2008
I get it, theoretically. And the way I wrote my point was poor, in that I attempted to go for what small bit of humor I thought was available to it as I was writing. In those occasions I often, afterwards, find myself dim. It's an issue. My point is: my screen is set, my feet are planted, if only for a moment. During the time that I am in my screen, my "personal space" is being invaded by a large body whose impetus is directing itself into my "personal space". If I choose to do nothing, said body will fall into my space, thus displacing me, and removing me from the ground I declared my own. I must make a move in reaction to the large body to continue to hold my ground. The most obvious move is the one shown in the video and in the picture you shared... a shoulder backed by a well planted hind leg. If no lean-in happened, both players would have fallen. West was clearly, in your offered pic, going to land within Horry's "personal space"/screen. West was guilty in not knowing where he was jumping.
posted by bobfoot at 12:58 AM on May 17, 2008
I think this is a case of "haterism". I mean Horry cow!! Come on now leave the guy alone. The seven time champion probaly knows how to ball.
posted by brandy at 09:27 AM on May 18, 2008
Ok after reading this it seems that all the Hornets fans are crying. It was a hard screen and the ref right there deemed it clean end of sentence. So stop hating on Horry and wipe your eyes it will be ok.
posted by Ravenhawk_03 at 07:34 PM on May 18, 2008
Oh come on, the ref didn't call a foul because one wasn't warranted. If it's legal, why not do it? And if a nudge is all it takes to seriously reinjure another player, should that player be on the court? West's back obviously didn't stop him from dropping 38 points on the Spurs in game 5.