LMAO @ ESPN's front page right now. It has Rafer and Pietrus with the heading " MAGIC BRICKDOM " how fitting.
http://www.nba.com/analysis/rules_11.html According to NBA rules. It's a violation if a. Touch the ball or the basket ring when the ball is using the basket ring as its lower base. The picture put up above, the ball wasn't using the basket ring as its lower base.
I just can't root for a rapist, even if Kobe was a Rocket it wouldn't be fun seeing him win. Any average "joe the plumber" would be crucified but as long as you playing pro sports, it's all good
The best reason I've heard why Gasol's shot was not goaltending also applies to Howards. He might have hit the net, and put his hand through the cylinder, but there was no chance the shot was going in, because Howard blocked it. The contact with the net and rim didn't interfere with the shot itself. Howard's hand did. Of course, I don't buy it in either case. It's true that the last shot didn't have a chance of going it, but I don't think you can say whether the shot would have been different if Gasol wasn't where he was, putting his hand through the cylinder. Calls like this used to be automatic. Actually, they never happened because the players knew they would be automatic. Now the officiating is so bad that players might as well try any violation, because chances are pretty good that the refs will screw it up. Given the current state of inconsistent officiating, I think it was probably better as a no-call. Not to mention that some refs might have been seriously injured if they had handed the game to the visiting team on a last second goaltending call.
NBA goaltending rules: http://www.nba.com/analysis/rules_11.html a. Touch the ball or the basket ring when the ball is using the basket ring as its lower base. b. Touch the ball when it is above the basket ring and within the imaginary cylinder. h. Touch the ball at any time with a hand which is through the basket ring. i. Vibrate the rim or backboard so as to cause the ball to make an unnatural bounce. Since Gasol didn't touch the ball, only rule A can be a potential violation. But the ball didn't use the ring as its lower base (which means it touches the ring as you can read from rule B). Gasol didn't vibrate the rim to cause unnatural bounce, the shot wasn't going in regardless. It's not a goaltending. In Howard's case, it's easily a GT by rule H.
He admitted it. “Although I truly believe this encounter between us was consensual, I recognize now that she did not and does not view this incident the same way I did,” It's a nicer way of saying that she wanted to have sex which they were doing, then she decided against it sometime while they were doing it, and he forced it on her anyways. Whether it was a setup so she could score money off of him by doing all of that, I dunno. But that's how I read it. Then he ended up paying her off on top of that and it does make you think he actually did rape her. I don't really care whether he's guilty or not. I respect his game on the court, dislike his on court persona, and don't give a damn about his off the court life. Whether he did rape her or not, only him and that woman know the truth.
That statement was part of the legal agreement, nothing he would have said on his own. I hate Kobe like anyone, but Kate was a psycho ho that planned the entire thing out to work him over for fame and cash. And she got what she wanted. Kobe cheats on his wife and is an ass, but he isn't really a rapist, as much as I'd love to taunt him.
Fran on Nick the Brick... Brick by brick, Anderson’s misses tore down Magic click link for rest of article
Guilty of adultery is one thing, guilty of rape is another. Last time I checked, people are innocent until proven otherwise.
