Final: USA vs Spain

[KWSN-Men]

If Chantal Julien indeed said this, then it's somewhat cowardly for her to come out months after a result and openly complain about American players gaining some advantage because FIBA's brass supposedly sent a "decree" to its refs about travelling. If she stood on her principles and believed in fairness as an official then she should have resigned and made her thoughts known during the Olympics or shortly thereafter, not months later during an interview with a French magazine whose motives none of us know.

Floating suggestions and rumors through the media is so piss-poor and weak that it's hard for me to take her seriously. It comes off sounding like sour grapes that the Americans won, which for some in Europe is a setback to the internationalisation of basketball, instead of someone who is creditable.

People on this forum have been circling this wagon for years as far as the US players travelling, as if such an advantage is so overwhelming that it negates any accomplishment the US has. People will bitch and complain about any mediocum of evidence that the Americans are getting favoritism from FIBA, and all the while ignoring other ugly characteristics of FIBA basketball: moving screens/picks, hooking (offensive player takes his arm and wraps it around a defender, typically on a spin move), hand checking, and low post wrestling. Basketball is suppose to be free-flowing, non-contact sport. It wasn't meant to be played like greco-roman wrestling.

I'm all for uniformity in the rules; if the US players are travelling--which even I observe sometimes--then they should be blown on it, but if the Euros/others are getting away with other violations that give them a clear advantage then whistle that as well.

I will let the bolded words embarass you on their own.

Where did the NBA physical game that Euro players can't compete go?

Pure BS.

I also like the fact that you think that an actual ref is not credible when talking about instructions given by the governing body of the sport. Who is credible then? David Stern?

Wow, this was hilarious

[Federoy]

I will let the bolded words embarass you on their own.

Where did the NBA physical game that Euro players can't compete go?

Pure BS.

I also like the fact that you think that an actual ref is not credible when talking about instructions given by the governing body of the sport. Who is credible then? David Stern?

Wow, this was hilarious

You should be more embarassed at how completely fucking ignorant your statement sounds. Had you carefully read what I wrote you would've noticed that we're talking about two seperate issues: You're talking about some perception, held by Americans or otherwise, that Euros are soft and can't compete against NBA players (BTW, nowhere in my passage did I mention or imply that. You decided to assume that BS your own).

I was merely pointing out that the basis of the sport is NON-CONTACT, which underscores the formation of rules that penalize players by A) giving the opposing team freethrow attempts and/or B) disqualifaction after 5 or 6 fouls. NBA, Euroleague, FIBA or whatever; free-flowing, non-contact is the essence of basketball. If it weren't, they'd be waring helmets and pads and there would be no fouls. If you can't understand that then perhaps you should choose another sport to watch.

And as it relates to the French ref, the only reason I brought it up was to highlight the physicality of FIBA Basketball, and how the low post wrestling, defensive hand checking and moving screens destroy the free-flowing, non-contact nature of basketball. So while all these malcontent Euros on this forum are bitching about Americans travelling, they don't seem to notice that on the international level the game is hampered by other problems that are just as troubling as when travelling isn't whistled.

As for her credibility, well...it's obvious to me that proof isn't required for you to believe something. Had she produced a memo or recorded a phone conversation or had another referee backed her up then she would have solid evidence to secure her claim. But just to openly claim, "oh...the Americans got away with travelling because FIBA's executives said so" with no proof is slanderous horse shit.

As I mentioned before, if she was so struck at how blatant FIBA was twisting its rules in favor of the US then she should've opened her mouth while the Olympics were in progress and not months later when the coast was clear. That does speak to her integrity. And if that doesn't strike you as odd then perhaps you're a bigger joke than she is.

[Federoy]

making polemics about that article was foolish

While I can appreciate her story, that doesn't give her the right to make serious allegations without backing them up with some form of evidence. There's nothing foolish about calling somebody out for making a public statement that is baseless, unfounded.

[robbe]

As I mentioned before, if she was so struck at how blatant FIBA was twisting its rules in favor of the US then she should've opened her mouth while the Olympics were in progress and not months later when the coast was clear. That does speak to her integrity. And if that doesn't strike you as odd then perhaps you're a bigger joke than she is.

That is easy for you to say as someone who doesn't suffer the consequences, but it is not realistic. Participating in such a big event as the Olympics, you just don't throw it away by making critical statements in the public towards the federation you are working for. We all want outspoken athletes [and referees] but it has been shown in the past they just don't want to risk losing everything by making critical comments. How many athletes actually sent a political message while in China? After all the big talking prior to the games? I may have missed it, but I can't think of one. Because they knew they'd get punished. And that was a way bigger topic. Just human nature. The same reason why no NBA ref comes forward talking about the star system. They don't want to lose their job. The best chance maybe to hear something from them is when they've already retired. That is what makes those few people that have the courage to blow the whistle so special.

I don't know if this particular referee is courageous, as I don't know her. I guess she was posed a question and just answered honestly. Or she just didn’t choose her words carefully enough. You try to discredit her in any possible way. Allow me to say that your rant on her sounds a little ridiculous, at least from my perspective.

Before the tournament I wrote a little preview in this forum on Team USA [we had a pretty good discussion there], which included one statement at the bottom, which nobody had a problem with at the time: That they’d have huge problems if travelling was called as it had been called e.g. in some pre-Olympic friendlies in 2004. I perfectly remember their first preperation game that summer against Italy in Cologne, right in front of my door so to say. The arena was full of NBA fans who wanted to grab that chance to see their heroes play. USA got called for travellings all night long. In the end, Italy won by seventeen points, the big stars looked foolish and the crowd turned 180 degrees. At the end of the game, Italy was given a standing ovation. Of course it was only their first game, they maybe had jetlag and Italy’s Basile was having a big day [which he is known for], I’m not saying they’d get blown out every time. However since then there has been a clear development, and as some here probably don’t give a damn on my opinion, I’d like to refer to Jeff Van Gundy [a well-respected basketball expert AND American], who I recall saying [while covering the 2008 NBA Finals] that you’d have to interfere on every possession if you called travelling like it should be called, as the players are used to have it officiated differently. As we probably all agree that it is impossible to adjust the moves you’ve done all your life in just a couple of weeks preparation time, and if we don't question the basketball knowledge of Jeff Van Gundy [I don't think anyone of us qualifies to do that] it is a logical assumption that they committed loads of travelling violations in the Olympic Games, which matches with the observations of many people that saw the games. Those, of course, were called bad losers and haters.

Of course you’ve got a point about hand-checking, physical play and screening, even if the differences between NBA and Europe are in my opinion smaller than it is advertised as far as the moving screens go. It is like “in Europe they only play the zone and it rains threes”. There might be fractions of the truth in such a statement, but reality is still a bit different. Of course they allow a bit more here, but they also call it inconsistently, which is a problem in European basketball, not just with the moving screen. On the other hand, you can witness loads of moving screens in an NBA game as well nowadays. The physical play is obviously a big part, and I don’t think anyone will deny it.

It is not important anyway to compare all these advantages and disadvantages and have pointless discussions about what would have been IF. As for my understanding, the point why many [including myself] are very dissatisfied with the way things have developed in FIBA basketball is that there’s an obvious exception being made for the NBA stars in order to make them look good on this stage and subsequently make FIBA make profit off them, after the disastrous outings of 2002-2006 [I don’t think they where all disastrous, but media made it certainly look that way]. Of course you won’t agree, and you probably want phone calls and bank accounts, but that’s the way it looks to me. I can live with knowing that FIBA is trying everything to make profit of course, not a big surprise actually. The problem is that some of those games were almost unwatchable. And that is not only my opinion, e.g. a lot of unbiased people on basketball forums who have no business with NBA, FIBA basketball, European basketball or whatever but have been working with junior teams or are officiating in lower leagues thought those games were "ridiculous".

[Federoy]

I perfectly remember their first preperation game that summer against Italy in Cologne, right in front of my door so to say. The arena was full of NBA fans who wanted to grab that chance to see their heroes play. USA got called for travellings all night long. In the end, Italy won by seventeen points, the big stars looked foolish and the crowd turned 180 degrees. At the end of the game, Italy was given a standing ovation. Of course it was only their first game, they maybe had jetlag and Italy’s Basile was having a big day [which he is known for], I’m not saying they’d get blown out every time.

Please robbe! You're completely mis-characterizing what took place in Cologne. By 2004, Europe's love affair with NBA superstars had already lost its novelty. It wasn't as if the beloved Michael Jordan and his Bulls were coming to town. For all intents and purposes the 2004 team was a poorly conceived, patched together collection of second tier players (i.e. Murbury, Odem, Jefferson) mixed with raising, yet unproven stars (i.e. Wade, James) that didn't have the prestige or fame of a Magic Johnson, Larry Bird or Charles Barkeley.

While I believe there were plenty of Germans and others who saw some in that group as "heroes", most Europeans at the Italy/US game already decided what side they were pulling for if the moment was right (and indeed the moment was right!). When you say the crowd "turned 180 degrees" that implies the crowd was in favor of the US from the opening tip and that the underdog Italians gradually won support, which is a very romantic assessment of what really took place. More than any other region, fans in the European basketball community don't want to see the US win over their national team or other national teams representing Europe.

After the Germany disaster, The same script followed in Belgrade vs. Serbia & Montenegro, in Istanbol vs. Turkey and in Athens vs. the field. The crowds were overwhelmingly against the US squad throughout Europe, even while in Athens against non-European opponents. Hell, even in the US their own countryman were against them! This wasn't a liked team by any scretch, but I've always believed that it wasn't the players' fault they looked foolish but those who put them in a position to look foolish (namely Larry Brown & staff and the officials at USA Basketball who were responsible for putting that team together.)

I don't know if this particular referee is courageous, as I don't know her. I guess she was posed a question and just answered honestly. Or she just didn’t choose her words carefully enough. You try to discredit her in any possible way. Allow me to say that your rant on her sounds a little ridiculous, at least from my perspective.

She must be courageous robbe, because either her fellow colleagues are scared shitless to tatty tell on FIBA's executives or the whole affair was simply made up or exaggerated. At any rate, I don't know this woman's motives so I'm in no position to claim speculation as fact.

Apparently you don't find it odd that these statements were made months after the Olympics have passed. I'm willing to go along with your reasoning about her not speaking out during a much politicized Olympics, but three months later? Fuck a magazine interview. Why not speak out a week after the games? or a month perhaps? Why not call a press conference and devulge your findings, even if it meant putting your career in jeopardy? Oh, that's right, that's not REALITY by your judgement. It's about PRINCIPLES, and I have to call her's into question if she can't stand by them in the face of some supposite scandel. If you want to give her a free pass that's your perogotive, but don't expect me to. Frankly you're entitled to your perspective about my ridiculous opinions. Far be it for me to try to convience those who are bent on believing their own realities.

It is not important anyway to compare all these advantages and disadvantages and have pointless discussions about what would have been IF

So it's only "pointless discussions" when you're confronted with the realities that the international game is plagued with its own faux pas like low post wrestling and moving screens, which are embedded in the international game on a far deeper level than in the NBA. You harp about travelling because by your estimation it benefits the US, no? Otherwise all of your rantings over the past four years would be mute. Face it, most Europeans only complain about rule interpretations when it doesn't suit them, and that's why little is mentioned about other aspects on rule interpretations that hurt the game and favor the FIBA brand of basketball. Are you really interested in cleaning up the sport by standardizing the rules or are you just another member of the chorus bitching because your pet peeve, travelling, isn't called consistently enough, thereby giving the Americans some unfair advantage? I'm all for respecting the "proper" calls when it comes to travel violations on NBA players so as long as the rest of the interpretations are officiated fairly.

As for my understanding, the point why many [including myself] are very dissatisfied with the way things have developed in FIBA basketball is that there’s an obvious exception being made for the NBA stars in order to make them look good on this stage and subsequently make FIBA make profit off them

So who came up with this grand theory? How exactly does FIBA profit from making US stars look good? Are you suggesting that David Stern and the folks he represents are giving FIBA kickbacks in order to secure favorable officiating? Such theorizing truly belongs on an internet blog forum.

My guess is that any new (keyword, "new") rule interpretation/development that has the slightest hint of NBA influence will be met by European purist as a corruption of the game, and they'll immediately claim that it's being done to give an unfair advantage to pre-madonna American super stars. And I'm sure with the 2009-10 changes taking place (abolishing the trapazoid paint and extending the 3-point line) people are already pointing to those items as proof.

Doesn't it seem contradictory to FIBA's stated goal of promoting the sport worldwide if it's complicite in allowing one country to win on its own terms? It would seem to me that FIBA would have a greater impact on promoting the sport by NOT patronizing US success to prove that parity now exists in basketball and that the sport has a place in an otherwise soccer crazy world. This theory doesn't hold water because it works against FIBA's self-interest. The NBA certainly has a business interest in promoting itself as a global brand, but it does that independently of FIBA (and has been doing so for 30 years), and it doesn't need an international governing body to do its bidding. FIBA doesn't collect a single penny from what the NBA generates in sales and TV contracts; they're completely seperate entities. And if FIBA does see a jump in viewership and prestige (translating into advertising dollars) because of NBA players, those compulsory gains don't outweight FIBA's bottomline of trying to promote what's best for the sport. Call me naive, I don't give a shit.

[1Dream Basketball]

great game

two great teams in a great championship1

[Yojanda]

haha look at the anti-american brigade of europeans in this thread. i read another thread at a relatively diverse forum-where the posters actually knew basketball-and guess what they were whining, moaning, and bitching about? NOTHING!

p.s. actually one poster did mention somethng about marc gasol's steroid rage.

[damelo]

haha look at the anti-american brigade of europeans in this thread. i read another thread at a relatively diverse forum-where the posters actually knew basketball-and guess what they were whining, moaning, and bitching about? NOTHING!

p.s. actually one poster did mention somethng about marc gasol's steroid rage.

You planned to make friends here

People here know stuff about basketball, be sure about that

[LittleLouie]

Usa!

The BBall at the Olympics was OK in 2008 for my opinion. I love the US.

[jaz08]

USA !!! is the team to beat in the olympics this year. They must assert themselves because of what they got last Olympics and WC.

[focos]

Without Calderon 107 points against USA was very hard to made.

Even we lost we must be proud. i dont know what would happen if calderon played the olympic final. we would have more chances to win. i don't say that Spain would have won sure but more chances clearly because Calderon is a NBA guard.

No National Team had scored that amount of points against USA neither olympics nor Worldbasket and probably it will take 30 or 40 years to see it.

[Chigusa]

Without Calderon 107 points against USA was very hard to made.

Even we lost we must be proud. i dont know what would happen if calderon played the olympic final. we would have more chances to win. i don't say that Spain would have won sure but more chances clearly because Calderon is a NBA guard.

No National Team had scored that amount of points against USA neither olympics nor Worldbasket and probably it will take 30 or 40 years to see it.

I'm not sure about that focos, I mean you obviously know your team better, but Jose played in the first game in group play. He played well in the first half, yet it was still a blowout. It is hard to say how that game would have played out if you add other players. That game was just 'right' for almost every player involved. Maybe adding another player totally alters the course of that game? You know like how they say about going back in time? That was an offensive shootout, the game was also called very tightly..many points were scored on the line..so that is where the point total comes from imo.

Calderon is a better NBA player than Navarro, but Juan Carlos went off in that final game (I believe part of this was because USA was not allowed to breathe on him, but I digress on that ). I think a great FIBA player gives a team the same, if not more of a chance than an NBA player..imo the FIBA player will have more respect from the refs. Spain severely challenged the U.S with a similar style, but I honestly don't see a team beating the U.S with an NBA Phoenix Suns like offensive approach. Since 2002 the U.S has averaged over 100 points vs Spain. I think it will take a blend of near offensive perfection and a more disciplined defense that Spain has displayed vs U.S..the last teams to that were Greece & Argentina.

What is scary though is how easily Spain put the defensive clamps down on teams in this most recent Eurobasket. They displayed tremendous team defense in the knockout stages. If Spain is indeed better on defense, and they can translate it to the WC then they will be extremely difficult to beat.