After four well refereed matches to start the season the three amigos completely lost control of this one, and a brilliant opening turned into a trip back in time to 2013 and a thoroughly ugly last 25 minutes.

Hopefully just a reminder of what not to do as the officiating has achieved a nice balance for the most part up until this game.

A: grind it out games is what Perth wants.

Spectacle on Fox is woeful. Showcases how 'plastic' the league looks. Last quarter, 5 fouls Perth. In less than 2 mins with 3 to play, both with 5 fouls.
Cant tell me Foxtel didnt change the game with live coverage when they had a TV timeout.

You won't beat Perth in an arm wrestle, but that's kind of what we got tonight.

If that's what they call Hardball, I was never a fan, just so many holds, pushes and shoulder charges for mine.

Officials called a few fouls but for me it was the cheap ones and a couple of useless travel calls while letting so much go that confused me and that inconsistent calling is what messes everything up.

Given that the referees sometimes get it wrong, I am still enjoying the start of the season and Perth look very strong, again!

There's attacking teams and there's defensive teams and there's even teams.
Perth are decidedly a defensive team. We're largely an offensive team.
It's the same in AFL, teams like Freo and Sydney win the arm wrestle, defensive games. Teams like Adelaide and West Coast try to outscore you. Teams like Hawthorn just beat you both ways.
Are some games more entertaining than others? Absolutely. But a team is going to play to their strengths and for some teams, those strengths are in creating an arm wrestle, then beating them at that game. Perth do this.

To answer the OP's question, no the NBL would prefer college ball where everybody just runs up and down dunking.
Personally, I prefer it where a dunk is actually earned and meaningful, but that's just me.

It's the same with the NBA, and its why they keep tweaking the rules.

Personally I prefer FIBA interpretations, and the reality is that a well-balanced team, that can play both strong offence and defence, will naturally beat a flashy offensive team.

Keep in mind, that the NBL itself doesn't actually care about winning. Think about it, in any game, you've got players, coaches, staff, and legions of fans, who care about nothing but winning, but the NBL itself just wants the game to be popular.
But the teams do, and they will bring everything to bear to make that happen. If that means getting ugly, then so be it.

Thanks all. My question was really rhetorical, I've played and coached at decent levels and love physical tough minded basketball, so for me despite being on the losing end tonight as a supporter I really enjoyed it. But I sit front row, people at home don't get to see things quite how I get to see them.

My concern was what it does to the sport as a tv product, so my question should really have been does this look as awful on tv as I think it does.

LK can spend all the money he wants but if the refs swallow their whistles guys (on both sides) will continue to foul and the viewers we need to attract I fear won't be liking what they see.

I could not attend but watched it on TV as a product the first half very entertaining to watch. Then the refs put the whistle away and it was very ugly to watch and really did not do the game justice.

If you think Perth were on the right side of the reffing last night, you might have had one too many beers.

You've missed the point Mr. Chalmers, well at least the one I'm making.

In any case I hope that's an exception like Paul said earlier and I hope the refs involved are aware of what that game would look like to the casual viewer.

The refs are a bit part of the league, and have one of the most crucial jobs to play in the league's recovery. A thankless tough job, but crucial. Hopefully they review the game and realise just how bad for the tv product last night would have been.

I wasn't responding to you Swagger.

My bad Chalmers, I misunderstood.

Aah, and so the truth finally comes out.
If the 6's lose, it's dirty ugly basketball, everyone hates it, its the refs' fault, and the NBL must do something about it.

Call me naive, but I really thought we could get past the first week before Adelaide fans started blaming their losses on the refs.

I think the SIMPLE explanation is that Joey's plan to combat Perth's stupendous size was to outrun them, and it mostly worked for the first 3 quarters, but the 6's didn't have enough in the tank to bring it home.

Tell me Dazz, who in this thread blamed the refs for the loss?

Ash, and so the truth finally comes out.

Dazz is a wildcats fan.

^Funny guy. Aah*

In regards to 10 min quarters not helping, why don't we do 11? ;) hit the middle ground between 10 and 12.

http://nba.nbcsports.com/2014/10/19/nbas-44-minute-game-clocks-in-at-under-two-hours-players-barely-notice/

NBL seriously needs some place for feedback / suggestions to take into consideration. They don't seem to respond to Facebook posts much and never get replies when you email them.

Having said that, LK is doing a good job in such little time so far.

"10 min quarters hardly helps. Players don't get into any rythm and lack repitions to get them out of shooting slumps."


One of the more 'interesting' theories I have seen lately.
How many players stay on the court for the entire 10 minutes of a quarter anyway? Of the zero that do, how many would stay for an extra 2 so that they could finally hit a shot? How many cool down so much during the brief 1Q & 3Q time breaks that it is like starting cold again in the 2nd/4th quarters?

I think the argument is probably I think if a game goes longer, there always more chance of someone getting hot at the end.

Part of the entertainment used to be seeing stars go for 25+ - 30 PPG regularly..

The argument would be that with 12 minute quarters you have an extra 8 minutes of game time.

That time would likely be spread through the existing rotation and see guys getting an extra 4-5mins...

I would think that some guys may settle into a groove by getting an extra couple of minutes earlier in their game.

On the flipside of the argument, can the NBL even consider reverting to 48 minutes with the broadcast agreements in place??? I thought the big driver for the 10 minute quarters was to fit it within the broadcast timeslots?

Yep, that's pretty much the same reason NBA were looking into condensing the game, then they smartened up and said they were going to mess with it's history, high scoring games/stats and also bench player minutes.

Like the article says, smaller rotations were going to be the problem, like it is now, no development of the other players.

Tell me Dazz, who in this thread blamed the refs for the loss?

And here's the ultimate tip. If you don't like watching defensive grind, then you are watching the wrong league, by about 20 years.

I disagree, Dazz - shit calling is shit calling no matter who wins.

I want to see basketball not basketbrawl!

"And here's the ultimate tip. If you don't like watching defensive grind, then you are watching the wrong league, by about 20 years."

Which leagues around the world have more of an offensive focus. I suspect you've never actually seen a real grind.

I miss those 131 - 108 score games. That and Matty Earp.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQSMDvwqt64

Everything changes over time, players get better, more skillful and bigger, at the same time more athletic and more powerful.

Coaches get better, they have a better understanding of the game, the opposition, how to defend and stop the other team's runs.

It is only when we look at all the combined influences in the game over time that we can begin to comprehend just how every little complexity along the way has created what we see on court today.

The rules have changed also, and so have interpretations, so this impacts on how games are officiated today.

Consistency, then becomes difficult to obtain, so where one game is an offensive joy to watch with open play and a high percentage scoring rate, another can end up being a grind, as we have labelled it.

I am enjoying the start of the season, I hope we get more open and free flowing games and the grinds are few and far between, but the cause that creates this difference is often subtle and can't be pointed at only one thing or one team, it is much more complex than that IMHO...

Dazz, try to refrain from making mentalistic assumptions and twisting quotes from other posters to suit your argument.

This thread has been predominately discussing the entertainment aspect of the 36ers-Wildcats game and how the officials approach the Wildcats' style of play, not blaming the refs for the 36ers losing.

Moreover, forget about the previous 20 years of the NBL: if you'd watched any other game in round 1 of this season - (no-so)coincidentally, none that included the Wildcats - you wouldn't have seen the "defensive grind" i.e. 'basketbrawl', wrestleball', we saw in the second half in Adelaide.

The reality is, the general rule in basketball is as quality improves, scoring declines. Across each continent, the highest quality league is amongst the lowest scoring.

That's where how you inteprit the rules of the game becomes important, as does the approach of coaches and their players, but the NBL, with the exception of a few years from around 1998-2000 and a couple of years following the ref crackdown in 2010, has always had an offensive mindset.

The past two years have had close to the highest scoring rate since the NBL became a truly professional comp in the mid-late 90s, and the majority of years the NBL has a higher scoring rate than the NBA.

True that, but final scores of 59 for a team aint gonna win over any fans..

The casual ones at least..

What percentage of NBL games have had a final score of 59?

The perception of a grind comes because teams here play scrappy, physical defence, pushing the limits of the refs. In seasons like 2001, 2010 and 2014 when things are called very tightly the product looks a lot better because offensive players can show off their skills.

The level of scrappy physicality is an issue that needs to be addressed consistently, because to the casual fan it just looks like bad basketball. In reality, the fact the league is still the highest scoring of the top leagues around the world is quite impressive. That doesn't help convert new fans though, particularly on TV.

No sooner than they do a crackdown on physicality then another group of fans (actually probably the same group) will start complaining that the refs need to "let them play."

Either way, as long as they find out how to get higher scoring games and stars gunning for 30 again, might get some casual fans in again.

Australia has no shortage of basketball/NBA fans, the NBA League Pass stats help prove that somewhat, not to mention grassroots participation. So if you're not doing your best to appeal to that group, you're not gonna get anywhere.

Entertainment peoples, Entertainment.

Absolutely! Happens every time. It needs to be done very early in the pre-season so all teams can prepare for it. The teams need to embrace it and the refs need to monitor it consistently.

It doesn't need to be calling every bit of contact, just being consistently tough on defenders who initiate contact and being tough on defenders who slide under airborne offensive players, rather than rewarding them with charges as has been the NBL way for a long time now (I feel in Round 1 they called the charge/block pretty well for the most part).

True, Supernintendo Chalmers. It's evidently a difficult balance for officials to maintain.

But by way of example: I thought the refs had that balance fairly well worked out in the other 6 games in round 1.

The "let them play" complaint is reflective of players not adapting to the referees interpretations quickly enough. It's understandable, especially given that some of the culprits have played this style the majority of their careers, but allowing them to push the boundaries can be bad for the NBL product.

Players and coaches need communication from officials regarding their direction so they have the opportunity to adapt, then the officials need to consistently follow through for an extended period of time. As Paul has eluded to: we haven't really had the latter occur of late.

Agree with you re Round 1 Mo, I thought the Adelaide-Perth game was definitely the exception, and that was probably the weakest crew of the round too.

The test comes next time two teams really push the boundaries, do the refs put the whistles away? If they do, all the other clubs will take notice and become more physical to push those limits.

I thought the first half of 36ers-Cats was some very entertaining basketball.
What changed?

It changed early to mid second quarter, both teams upping the defensive physicality to try and contain their oppo who were scoring freely. The game was in a rhythm so understandably the refs let it flow, but the physicality just grew and grew without the refs reclaiming control.

Maybe they should have made it #Smoothball instead

The other key area for the NBL to change is perception. Oer the past two seasons, almost half of scores have been 85 or above (102ppg in 48min games) and only about 20% have been below 75 (90ppg in 48min games), yet the perception exists that NBL games are 65-58 defensive slogs.

That's where the TV production and the work making highlights available to the public become crucial. There were a heap of highlights from opening round yet where can I see them without scrolling back through the NBL twitter feed?

Links to this plays should be front and centre on the NBL website, pumped out again on social media during the week to promote upcoming games, they should be replayed in subsequent TV broadcasts, and the NBL should invest in ads on Fox Sports showcasing the best plays to a catchy tune.

Without changing perceptions it will be hard for the NBL to make ground.

Tonight was another game where the physicality just grew and grew and the refs let too much go, which in the end forced them to call a lot because both NZ and Illawarra were pushing the boundaries so far.

There was so much niggly contact let go in that game that by the end it barely resembled basketball.

As for the refs calling the charge/block well in Round 1 (which they did), tonight's crew was back to the old Aussie way, Matt Beattie (who's a decent ref) falling for flops all over the place.

Thankfully Penney and Co were able to put on a show and make the game entertaining.

Agree about the flopping.
Just because a body goes flying doesn't mean a whistle needs to be blown. I get that it's probably a hard habit to break out of.

Dazz, if you were paying attention to what I originally wrote, and the timing of when I wrote it, the Sixers actually had a small lead. Not that will make you change your mind.

Paul, agree with everything you have said. I only watched the first half tonight and it was decent to watch, a few dunks, a good shooting display from Penny, the curtain made the crowd look better than what it was with not many empty seats on tv. Could have been more of a contest but can't have everything, and the fast pace made it feasible for New Zealand to quickly make a run. Disappointing to hear it slowed down a lot in the second half.