PDA

View Full Version : La Salle Protests the last game with Ateneo



gameface_one
07-28-2007, 12:51 PM
La Salle may protest loss to Ateneo in UAAP game


By Jasmine W. Payo
Inquirer
Last updated 09:29pm (Mla time) 07/27/2007


De La Salle University may protest its recent loss to Ateneo de Manila University in the UAAP men's basketball competition.

La Salle noted Friday that Ateneo fielded foreign players Kirk Long and Zion Laterre at the same time in the second quarter of the Thursday blockbuster showdown where the Eagles outclassed the Archers, 80-77, in overtime.

Teams may line up a maximum of two foreigners, but a league rule states that only one foreign player is allowed to play on court at any given time.

Laterre is a 6-foot-3 Australian forward, while the 6-foot-1 Long is an American rookie guard.

UAAP commissioner Ed Cordero said La Salle has until 7 p.m. on Saturday to file an official protest.

gameface_one
07-28-2007, 12:52 PM
It is confirmed that La Salle just filed a protest. We will get a copy of the official letter from La Salle shortly.

eightyfiver
07-28-2007, 12:58 PM
Sayang, it was a mental lapse on the asst. coaches. They should remind coach Norman of this rule.

It was a clear violation of the rule. So, why should a protest be filed?

Out_Of_The_Blue
07-28-2007, 01:00 PM
I think the story is that Kirk was sent by Norman to sub for Zion Laterre. Kirk said something like "sub for Zi." The table official understood it to be "Jai" so Jai came out after the official called his name. Knowing that no 2 foreigners can play on the court at the same time, the coaching staff had the presence of mind not to let Kirk enter the court.

bluewing
07-28-2007, 03:12 PM
classic lasal dickery.

Birdland
07-28-2007, 03:22 PM
Kirk and Zion weren't in the game at any time during the game. They would've been hadn't Kirk and Jai notice the little snaffu and decided to correct the mistake themselves -- they immediately subbed for each other again. Hence, the technical against Jai for re-entering the game without the officials' permission. Ateneo was penalized for that already.

Zion and Kirk were never together at any time during Thursday's game.

La Salle should really learn to lighten up. Relax guys it's just a loss. Malay nyo, baka makabawi kayo next round.

bluewing
07-28-2007, 03:37 PM
well,

hayaan natin sila.

may right naman silang mag-FILE ng protesta.

now, as to whether they have a cause of action OR whether their motion is meritorious, ibang usapan na yan.

ang masama lang dito ay hindi naman matatalino yung mga mag-de-decide ng kaso.

kung maganda sana ang reputation ng board, eh di tapos na to sa 1st quarter pa lang.

nightowl
07-28-2007, 06:07 PM
If you watch the replay it was obvious that Long entered the court and Jai was on the bench when the game resumed. that means Long and Laterre where on the court at the same time.

Why don't you check tapes/videos of the game?

I did. Norman committed a mistake, sorry, but you have to suffer the consequences.

bluewing
07-28-2007, 06:09 PM
yes, jai was on the bench.

but it does not necessarily mean kirk was in play. there were FOUR Ateneo players in the court.

Pizza Guy
07-28-2007, 06:16 PM
It won't prosper.*


http://img243.imageshack.us/img243/9863/ateneodlrt072607sn4.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

vickster
07-28-2007, 06:24 PM
If you watch the replay it was obvious that Long entered the court and Jai was on the bench when the game resumed. that means Long and Laterre where on the court at the same time.

Why don't you check tapes/videos of the game?

I did. Norman committed a mistake, sorry, but you have to suffer the consequences.


studio 23's coverage showed la salle inbounding from the backcourt. when the camera panned to the frontcourt, there were four ateneo players on the floor, long was standing beside norman black ON THE SIDELINES.

i am not sure what tape or video you watched, but it certainly wasn't the studio 23 coverage, because nowhere does it show Long entering the court.

i watched the tape, and i watched live at araneta. in neither instance was long on the court when play resumed.

Pizza Guy
07-28-2007, 06:37 PM
If you watch the replay it was obvious that Long entered the court and Jai was on the bench when the game resumed. that means Long and Laterre where on the court at the same time.

Why don't you check tapes/videos of the game?

I did. Norman committed a mistake, sorry, but you have to suffer the consequences.


Peram naman ng version mo ng La Salle Scandal. :o

http://img243.imageshack.us/img243/9863/ateneodlrt072607sn4.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

muddatrucker
07-28-2007, 06:54 PM
I did. Norman committed a mistake, sorry, but you have to suffer the consequences.

Suffer the consequences of what? Making a mistake that had no effect on the game? Puh-leez.

BigBlue
07-28-2007, 07:50 PM
I did. Norman committed a mistake, sorry, but you have to suffer the consequences.


hindi ata si norman ang nagkamali. it was the barker. magkatunong nga naman ang "Zi" at "Jai".

Wingman
07-28-2007, 08:16 PM
Peram naman ng version mo ng La Salle Scandal. :o



Peram ng copy mo nung grades ni Japeth nung highschool.

Yung totoong copy ha.

cub
07-28-2007, 10:15 PM
bakit naman si Zi ang papalitan ni Kirk? big man si Zi, tapos si Kirk ang papalit sa kanya? para kay Jai talaga un. tsk tsk tsk. mali ang alibi..

muddatrucker
07-28-2007, 10:34 PM
bakit naman si Zi ang papalitan ni Kirk? big man si Zi, tapos si Kirk ang papalit sa kanya? para kay Jai talaga un. tsk tsk tsk. mali ang alibi..

Bakit? May rule ba na nagsasabing same position dapat ang sub? Honestly, hindi ka pa ba nakakakita ng guard na nag-sub for a forward? For a center?

Still, whether or not BigBlue's statement is correct is irrelevant. Fact is, the error did not affect the outcome of the game. Ngayon, kung gusto ang decision ng board ay iaward sa La Salle ang game dahil sa technicality na WALANG KINALAMAN SA FINAL SCORE (if anything, La Salle pa ang nag-benefit), bahala sila pero magmumukha lang tanga ang La Salle at UAAP board.

agdlc
07-28-2007, 10:35 PM
bakit naman si Zi ang papalitan ni Kirk? big man si Zi, tapos si Kirk ang papalit sa kanya? para kay Jai talaga un. tsk tsk tsk. mali ang alibi..


zion was fielded in for a few minutes, wherein he made 2 turnovers on his first 2 possessions. this was due to the lasalle defense. maybe:

1) kirk long was brought in for better ball-handling without compromising rebounding (he totaled 7 rebounds for the game)
2) kirk long was brought in to match the faster, "small ball" lineup of dlsu at that time (with ferdinand at center, casio, malabes, villanueva and mangahas[?] at 1-4) which put immense pressure on the ballhandlers of ateneo

atenean_blooded
07-28-2007, 10:57 PM
They can award another technical foul.

They can even assume both charities were made.

Ok na?

dose
07-28-2007, 11:10 PM
They can award another technical foul.

They can even assume both charities were made.

Ok na?


Unfortunately, forfeiture ang penalty for fielding 2 imports.

shyboy
07-28-2007, 11:30 PM
They can award another technical foul.

They can even assume both charities were made.

Ok na?


Pwede na rin. Tapos na sa regulation, lamang La Salle by two points. Wala nang OT. ;D

shyboy
07-28-2007, 11:38 PM
yes, jai was on the bench.

but it does not necessarily mean kirk was in play. there were FOUR Ateneo players in the court.


No one cares even if Kirk Long was in the bathroom playing with himself at the time. The fact is he came in to replace Jai Reyes and that was what the barker announced. Norman Black never corrected the barker's call, thus, it is official. Long is the fifth man for Ateneo when the ball was inbounded and brought up until past the halfcourt.

atenean_blooded
07-28-2007, 11:49 PM
They can award another technical foul.

They can even assume both charities were made.

Ok na?


Pwede na rin.* Tapos na sa regulation, lamang La Salle by two points.* Wala nang OT.* *;D


So pati yung paglaro niyo hanggang overtime, biglang gusto niyong alisin?

Wala talagang prinsipyo, ano? :)

bluewing
07-28-2007, 11:56 PM
No one cares even if Kirk Long was in the bathroom playing with himself at the time.* The fact is he came in to replace Jai Reyes and that was what the barker announced.* Norman Black never corrected the barker's call, thus, it is official.* Long is the fifth man for Ateneo when the ball was inbounded and brought up until past the halfcourt.



pang-uaap board and logic mo, bata. * :P


and your so-called facts are established? di ba't yun nga ang pag-aaralan?


the interpretation of the wording of the rule will have to come into play. because technically, kirk supposedly did not "play" with zion in those precious moments since he supposedly did not enter the playing court. while the record-keeper's pad paper or whatever may indicate that zi and kirk were together in the court, they will have to look at other evidence to determine if this was indeed true. the best evidence in this case should be video footages and eyewitness accounts, preferably of those sitting on courtside.

atenean_blooded
07-28-2007, 11:57 PM
yes, jai was on the bench.

but it does not necessarily mean kirk was in play. there were FOUR Ateneo players in the court.


No one cares even if Kirk Long was in the bathroom playing with himself at the time.* The fact is he came in to replace Jai Reyes and that was what the barker announced.* Norman Black never corrected the barker's call, thus, it is official.* Long is the fifth man for Ateneo when the ball was inbounded and brought up until past the halfcourt.


If Kirk Long was in the bathroom playing with himself, how could he have played side-by-side with Laterre?

Constructive presence?

shyboy
07-28-2007, 11:58 PM
^ Ikaw naman ang nagbigay ng fictional situation eh, di ako. *:)

shyboy
07-29-2007, 12:06 AM
No one cares even if Kirk Long was in the bathroom playing with himself at the time.* The fact is he came in to replace Jai Reyes and that was what the barker announced.* Norman Black never corrected the barker's call, thus, it is official.* Long is the fifth man for Ateneo when the ball was inbounded and brought up until past the halfcourt.



pang-uaap board and logic mo, bata. * :P


and your so-called facts are established? di ba't yun nga ang pag-aaralan?


the interpretation of the wording of the rule will have to come into play. because technically, kirk supposedly did not "play" with zion in those precious moments since he supposedly did not enter the playing court. while the record-keeper's pad paper or whatever may indicate that zi and kirk were together in the court, they will have to look at other evidence to determine if this was indeed true. the best evidence in this case should be video footages and eyewitness accounts, preferably of those sitting on courtside.


Even if Long was standing outside the playing court, he was the one who asked permission from the official's table to be allowed to go in. And obviously, he was allowed to "play." Now, regardless if he was just standing inside or outside the playing court, the referees do not care. Officially, he is still part of the "playing five." Kaya nga kahit na may injured na player outside the playing court, live ball pa rin and the injured player is still part of the playing five.

That's how it is supposed to be interpreted.

bluewing
07-29-2007, 12:10 AM
That's how it is supposed to be interpreted.




???


wow. check out the legal giant here.


i guess we no longer need the technical committee's report or even board deliberations, because this little lasalyte has got it all figured out.

atenean_blooded
07-29-2007, 12:15 AM
Even if Long was standing outside the playing court, he was the one who asked permission from the official's table to be allowed to go in.* And obviously, he was allowed to "play."* Now, regardless if he was just standing inside or outside the playing court, the referees do not care.* Officially, he is still part of the "playing five."* Kaya nga kahit na may injured na player outside the playing court, live ball pa rin and the injured player is still part of the playing five.

That's how it is supposed to be interpreted.



How do you propose that we interpret the incontrovertible fact that La Salle failed to bring this to the attention of the officials during the game, especially since Pumaren had all the time in the world to make a big fuss about it while he was arguing with Norman Black and the referees, and then accepted a technical foul, and then went on to lose the game?

bluewing
07-29-2007, 12:18 AM
How do you propose that we interpret the incontrovertible fact that La Salle failed to bring this to the attention of the officials during the game, especially since Pumaren had all the time in the world to make a big fuss about it while he was arguing with Norman Black and the referees, and then accepted a technical foul, and then went on to lose the game?




ang tawag dyan ay "PLAN B"

keempee
07-29-2007, 12:37 AM
pwede kasing pumaren believed the T was for jai reyes' illegal entry into the game. i mean, it was blatant and was seen. they probably realized the violation of the lago rule after the game. or even if he had realized it early, there's really nothing wrong playing it out as a victory for them would make things moot and academic.

i guess the important thing is if the gameclock had moved from the moment the barker announced long's entry until jai's illegal reentry into the playing court to determine whether game time was actually used with laterre and long together as ateneo's five.

just playing devil's advocate here. really hope this doesnt get decided in the board.

agdlc
07-29-2007, 12:41 AM
"Ateneo committed a violation of Rule # IX, the rule on no two foreigners playing at the same time," La Salle noted in an official letter signed by Archers coach Franz Pumaren and endorsed by La Salle board representative Brother Bernard S. Oca, FSC. (http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/sports/view_article.php?article_id=79252)

one side is arguing that although kirk long was supposed to be "in play" but refused to and did not actually, "play". instead, said player was illegaly replaced by jai reyes which warranted a technical foul. 2 free throws and ball possession was rewarded to the opposing team. it is interpreted that this sequence of events did not put ateneo in a position of advantage to win the game. in fact, it put them in a more precarious position. in other words, "kirk didn't play anyway, and you got two free throws plus momentum, so you were the ones who gained from what happened."

the other side is arguing that kirk long was "in play" on paper, and it doesn't matter whether he was, in reality, "playing" or not. it is claimed that the barker's announcement makes it official that he is "in play", and "in play" = "playing". it is interpreted that the question regarding the effect of this occurrence on the outcome of the game is irrelevant. in other words, "the barker announced it, therefore kirk was in play. if he was in play, he was playing. and therefore, the rule was broken and penalties must be handed out"

this IS a tough call. both arguments do have merit. i guess it may come down to how the word "play" is defined. objectively, lasalle makes a good point. subjectively, ateneo makes a good point.

whatever happens, i hope that uaap sports is not overshadowed by the same technicalities which were made to protect it. like the spurs-suns bench clearing incident of this year's playoffs, sometimes the rules can just make no sense at all when applied to certain situations. and these technicalities can be the difference between losing a series and winning the nba title. but then again, the value of rules cannot be disregarded.

bluewing
07-29-2007, 12:49 AM
pwede kasing pumaren believed the T was for jai reyes' illegal entry into the game. i mean, it was blatant and was seen. they probably realized the violation of the lago rule after the game.* or even if he had realized it early, there's really nothing wrong playing it out as a victory for them would make things moot and academic.



that, my friend, is what makes the whole thing stink.

think about it. if franz was really motivated by his desire to champion the UAAP rules and regulations, the protest should have been made right there and then so that if there was indeed a violation, game should've been stopped and maybe even award the game to lasal. the archers were even leading at that point.

but no, franz opted to resume play and go for a win. obviously, he had no real intention of upholding any rule as he was motivated purely with the thought of beating Ateneo. and ikaw na rin ang nagsabi, a victory for them would've rendered the entire thing moot since franz would most probably downplay it and hark on the supremacy of "lasal basketball" once again. you can bet your left nut that had lasal won, wala nang protesta.


and now that his team lost, suddenly he's the guardian of the rulebook. can you not see the hypocrisy?

atenean_blooded
07-29-2007, 01:18 AM
I also suppose that Pumaren pretty much knew that he was seen on TV shaking Norman Black's hand after the game.

Unless, of course, handshakes are supposed to be empty gestures.

bluewing
07-29-2007, 01:20 AM
I also suppose that Pumaren pretty much knew that he was seen on TV shaking Norman Black's hand after the game.

Unless, of course, handshakes are supposed to be empty gestures.


pare naman... don't be naive.


si Jesus nga, hinalikan pa ni Hudas eh...

shyboy
07-29-2007, 01:25 AM
^ *That is based on the presumption that Franz indeed was aware of the infraction at that time. *The La Salle coaching staff realized the probable infraction only after reviewing the tapes. *Even most of you tangeneans are saying til yesterday Jai Reyes came in while it was still a dead ball. *However, the video now shows otherwise.

Your coach Norman Black made a boo-boo and he knew it. *It's now up to the UAAP to analyze if he was able to correct that mistake in the nick of time or not.

bluewing
07-29-2007, 01:31 AM
the deadball situation being referred to was with regard to kirk, not jai. that he was on his way to play, but didn't enter when play resumed.

atenean_blooded
07-29-2007, 01:34 AM
pwede kasing pumaren believed the T was for jai reyes' illegal entry into the game. i mean, it was blatant and was seen. they probably realized the violation of the lago rule after the game.* or even if he had realized it early, there's really nothing wrong playing it out as a victory for them would make things moot and academic.


Which brings me back to an earlier point.

It's not the Ateneo officials' fault that the La Salle bench failed to make this an issue during the little discussion between Black and Pumaren. As far as the incontrovertible facts show, La Salle accepted the technical foul, went on to play the game, and then lost, and after the final buzzer, the same bench and Pumaren walked toward Norman Black and shook hands, acknowledging defeat.

shyboy
07-29-2007, 01:56 AM
^ Acknowledging defeat is one thing. Finding out later there's a probable infraction by the opponent is another. If we put it in words, ganito yan:

Franz: Congratulations Norman, nice game!
Norman: Thanks, Franz. It was a clean game.
(After reviewing the tapes..)
Franz: Hoy Negro, may mali ka palang ginawa eh. May pa-clean game, clean game ka pa dyan. Kung sinabi mo agad, inayos na sana natin 'to kahapon.

atenean_blooded
07-29-2007, 02:03 AM
^* Acknowledging defeat is one thing.* Finding out later there's a probable infraction by the opponent is another.* If we put it in words, ganito yan:

Franz:* Congratulations Norman, nice game!
Norman:* Thanks, Franz.* It was a clean game.
(After reviewing the tapes..)
Franz:* Hoy Negro, may mali ka palang ginawa eh.* May pa-clean game, clean game ka pa dyan.* Kung sinabi mo agad, inayos na sana natin 'to kahapon.



And the entire La Salle bench's inability to spot an infraction during the game is Norman Black's fault?

Would this have been an issue had La Salle won the game?

joelex
07-29-2007, 02:17 AM
ateneo won the game clearly. sadly though technicality is part of the game.

if the ateneo assistants had the presence of mind (dami pa naman sila) to remind their coach, wala na sanang issue.

keempee
07-29-2007, 02:27 AM
pwede kasing pumaren believed the T was for jai reyes' illegal entry into the game. i mean, it was blatant and was seen. they probably realized the violation of the lago rule after the game. or even if he had realized it early, there's really nothing wrong playing it out as a victory for them would make things moot and academic.


Which brings me back to an earlier point.

It's not the Ateneo officials' fault that the La Salle bench failed to make this an issue during the little discussion between Black and Pumaren. As far as the incontrovertible facts show, La Salle accepted the technical foul, went on to play the game, and then lost, and after the final buzzer, the same bench and Pumaren walked toward Norman Black and shook hands, acknowledging defeat.


ahm, again, i probably wasnt clear, they could argue that the technical was for jai's illegal entry into the game. perhaps, they only realized the violation of the two foreigners' rule afterwards, which was probably why they didnt make an issue of it during the little discussion. there's a reason why they allow 48 hours for protests to be filed.

let's not be naive with regards to handshakes. it's customary and part of tradition. agassi would shake becker's hand even if he hated his guts. hockey teams which featured lindros and stevens line up to tap each other after a playoff series even though they would still vow to injure or give the other concussion the next time they meet. dont get me wrong.. i think it's a good custom and tradition; but let's not read too much into it as a complete acknowledgment by one side of defeat.

i do agree with bluewing that it stinks, however. anything not decided within the confines of the court stinks. but im trying to cast away my biases for THE school and be as objective as possible. weighing everything, both sides have good points, but i feel that lasalle's may be valid.

Mateen Cleaves
07-29-2007, 07:02 AM
I also suppose that Pumaren pretty much knew that he was seen on TV shaking Norman Black's hand after the game.

Unless, of course, handshakes are supposed to be empty gestures.


In this case, yeah. Watching on TV, that was my first reaction to the handshake between Black and Pumaren, former colleagues on the SMB bench. Limp fish handshakes from both parties. :)

nightowl
07-29-2007, 08:13 AM
They can award another technical foul.

They can even assume both charities were made.

Ok na?


Pwede na rin.* Tapos na sa regulation, lamang La Salle by two points.* Wala nang OT.* *;D


So pati yung paglaro niyo hanggang overtime, biglang gusto niyong alisin?

Wala talagang prinsipyo, ano? :)

Walang prinsipyo?

You want to pull a fast one by sneaking out Long and sneaking in Jai AFTER REALIZING A STUPID MISTAKE (which Norman Black/coaching staff should never have committed) and you talk about principles? Norman says they only had 4 players on the court-of course, if you pull one guy off, a second earlier! If you can't see that, no eye doctor in the world can help you.

Why not admit that a mistake was made and accept the consequences, if any?

Actually, there is an admission that a mistake in the subbing was made, but the contention of Ricky Palou is that they never played together(Zion and Kirk). What constitutes "playing together"? Is it not being part of the 5 on the court? They don't have to pass the ball to each other, or run down the court together, do they?

The rules state forfeiture for violation of this basic ground rule of the UAAP. It does not qualify the rule with a "if it does not affect the outcome of the game" thing. DLSU should not even have to protest a basic rule. The commissioner's office, IF IT BELIEVES THERE WAS A POSSIBLE OFFENSE, should have investigated and reported its findings to the board. Before DLSU protested, there were talks, text messages (from Ateneans, the REAL KIND) and some papers already came out with the possibility of a protest. The commissioner's office/technical committee could have (maybe they did) initiated an investigation, without waiting for a protest.

Howard the Duck
07-29-2007, 08:48 AM
kung nanalo DLSU may protest pa din kaya considering they want to be fair?

i don't think technical fouls can be awarded since wala naman sa FIBA rules yung incident in question.

admu_addict
07-29-2007, 09:20 AM
I'll have to agree on this one. We lost fair and square on the court. No need to bring this up to the boardroom. Mas masarap pa rin ang feeling ng won ballgame on the court. Congratulations to the Blue Eagles for a well-deserved won ballgame last night. See you in the 2nd round.

In addition, GreenArrows wants to say that he is also against the protest. La Salle wins and loses on the court, not through some board decision.


yoohooo.... so is this still your stand? how about GreenArrows?

da_rasmus
07-29-2007, 09:32 AM
Well, ganun talaga. We have to follow the rules (kaya nga nag-eexist ung rules para sundin diba?)

gameface_one
07-29-2007, 09:36 AM
Ateneo-DLSU game placed under protest

Sunday, July 29, 2007
philstar.com


If needed, La Salle will present its own video footage to prove that Ateneo committed an infraction and broke a UAAP rule when it had two foreign-born players simultaneously on the court Thursday.

“We have our own set of videos. This is a different one. The ABS-CBN video does not clearly show the Ateneo infraction. This is our ace,” La Salle board representative Chuck Buenaventura told The STAR yesterday.

La Salle, which lost in overtime to Ateneo at the Big Dome, placed the game under protest, claiming that the Blue Eagles had American Kirk Long and Australian Zion Laterre on the floor at the same time in the second quarter.

Under UAAP rules, a team cannot field in both its foreign-born players at the same time.

“It happened so fast so it was not noticeable even when their coaching staff realized that they made a mistake. At one point, they looked like they were trying to hide something,” said the La Salle official.

Laterre was already on the court when Long replaced Jai Reyes during a dead-ball situation. The ball, La Salle claimed, was already in play when Ateneo noticed the lapse, and coach Norman Black immediately tapped Reyes to replace Long.

Hurriedly, the 5-foot-7 Reyes came in, and was slapped a technical foul for not informing the table officials of the new substitution.

“Ateneo has a point that the mistake was corrected. But there was already an infraction. That’s why we have no choice but support the recommendation of the team to place the game under protest,” Buenaventura added.

“There is more merit on our part, and we’re trying to drive a point here that there was an infraction of the league rule. We are looking at a forfeiture of that Ateneo win,” he said.

Ricky Palou, Ateneo’s representative to the UAAP board of trustees, welcomed the protest but maintained that Laterre and Long were never on the playing court at the same time.

“Almost,” he said. “The rule states that they cannot play together. They never did. Bring the case to the technical committee and let it decide on the merit. They (Green Archers) just don’t know how to lose.”

Meanwhile, University of the East climbed to 5-0 after crushing UP, 97-66, for the biggest winning margin of the season so far. National U whipped Adamson in the other game, 91-76.

cl.blue.24
07-29-2007, 10:21 AM
Like what was mentioned here before, it all depends on the definition of "play". When the barker announced that Kirk would sub for Jai, does that immediately mean that Kirk and Zi were "playing" together? The barker made a mistake because Kirk was intended to sub for Zi, and not Jai.

Birdland
07-29-2007, 10:30 AM
However this whole episode turns out.* It will never take away the fact that after 45 minutes of playing basketball, the final score was 80 for Ateneo and 77 for La Salle.* That is essentially what matters.

Some people should really learn how to accept defeat.* It's not that difficult.* They'll be better off as people in the long term.

agdlc
07-29-2007, 10:51 AM
it is generally misunderstood how "rules are rules" is the be-all and end-all argument, the mother of all lines of reasoning. things are not as simple and straightforward as "you break it, you buy it". when incidents which don't happen by natural causes occur, a direct connection between action and harm must be established, and the elements of causation and intent must be examined to infer the cause of the misdeed.

in other words, rules must always be interpreted in the context of the situation. otherwise, if the argument is "killing another person warrants the death penalty", if you discount the circumstances, the man who kills a a lunatic trying to massacre the man's family should accordingly be executed. wouldn't taking the man's motives into consideration make for a better hearing?

so the questions are: did ateneo intentionally field in kirk long WITH zion laterre during those few seconds to get an unfair advantage over lasalle in that game? how did that episode affect the outcome of the game? these are what the "foreign player" rules of the uaap try to protect anyway- that fielding in two foreign players would tip the scales in favor of one team. so did it?

if you're complaining that "rules are rules- that's it", then maybe you do not believe in the purpose of a judicial system. i think we have to delve deeper into this than that.

if you're complaining about "oh they were trying to cover their mistake by subbing jai reyes illegaly", then 1)you infer that we acknowledged the transgression 2) you infer that we had no malicious intent to carry out the transgression - by purposely nullifying this action with an immediate substitution, albeit illegaly, 3) you infer that the substitution of jai reyes was a transgression performed with malicious intent. the third and last point has been dealt with during the course of the game, the technical foul was given as well as two free throws plus ball possession. that is over and done with.

the first two points however reveal that the argument itself points to no malicious intent by the ateneo team to break the said rule. taking that into consideration, intent (was the ateneo team trying to get an unfair advantage over lasalle with that sequence of events? NO.) and causation (what was the result of that sequence of events? did that affect the outcome of the game? NO.), then what is the basic premise of the argument of lasalle? "rules are rules"? "you break it, you buy it"?.

eightyfiver
07-29-2007, 11:23 AM
^atty, pahingi po ng calling card. 8)

admu_addict
07-29-2007, 11:32 AM
na elibs ka noh

atenean_blooded
07-29-2007, 11:49 AM
Walang prinsipyo?

Once again, in all caps: WALANG PRINSIPYO.



You want to pull a fast one by sneaking out Long and sneaking in Jai AFTER REALIZING A STUPID MISTAKE (which Norman Black/coaching staff should never have committed) and you talk about principles? Norman says they only had 4 players on the court-of course, if you pull one guy off, a second earlier! If you can't see that, no eye doctor in the world can help you.

Why not admit that a mistake was made and accept the consequences, if any?

Long and Laterre did not play together. Unless, of course, you can show that the game clock was moving with both players in the playing court together.



Actually, there is an admission that a mistake in the subbing was made, but the contention of Ricky Palou is that they never played together(Zion and Kirk). What constitutes "playing together"? Is it not being part of the 5 on the court? They don't have to pass the ball to each other, or run down the court together, do they?

So you subscribe to shyboy's little scenario that Long could have been in the bathroom playing with himself, and he'd still be playing together with Zion?



The rules state forfeiture for violation of this basic ground rule of the UAAP. It does not qualify the rule with a "if it does not affect the outcome of the game" thing. DLSU should not even have to protest a basic rule. The commissioner's office, IF IT BELIEVES THERE WAS A POSSIBLE OFFENSE, should have investigated and reported its findings to the board. Before DLSU protested, there were talks, text messages (from Ateneans, the REAL KIND) and some papers already came out with the possibility of a protest. The commissioner's office/technical committee could have (maybe they did) initiated an investigation, without waiting for a protest.


Again, would this have been made an issue had La Salle managed to beat the Blue Eagles?

Of course not.

Once again, in all caps: WALANG PRINSIPYO.

bluewing
07-29-2007, 12:34 PM
Like what was mentioned here before, it all depends on the definition of "play". When the barker announced that Kirk would sub for Jai, does that immediately mean that Kirk and Zi were "playing" together? The barker made a mistake because Kirk was intended to sub for Zi, and not Jai.


if we are to follow lasal's reasoning, the barker was more powerful than the refs/officials because his mere announcement dictated who was actually in play.

yungha
07-29-2007, 01:08 PM
re: rules are rules - case in point, 2003 Ateneo-dlsu final four game 1. when the tenorio-gaco scuffle broke out, the entire lasal team left the bench and rushed to the Ateneo side. following the rules are rules principle, the entire lasal should've been suspended for leaving their bench.

atenean_blooded
07-29-2007, 01:10 PM
For those who insist that the Lago decision is no longer controlling, the Lady Eagles having forfeited a previous game versus UP, there are some things to consider:

- In the Lago decision, there was a board decision. The board junked the protest.
- In the situation of the Lady Eagles, there was no board decision. The Lady Eagles forfeited before a protest was made.

Thus if we're relying on board decisions as bases for precedents, the Lago ruling is still controlling.

Jeep
07-29-2007, 01:14 PM
bakit naman si Zi ang papalitan ni Kirk? big man si Zi, tapos si Kirk ang papalit sa kanya? para kay Jai talaga un. tsk tsk tsk. mali ang alibi..

Bakit?* *May rule ba na nagsasabing same position dapat ang sub?* Honestly, hindi ka pa ba nakakakita ng guard na nag-sub for a forward?* For a center?

Still, whether or not BigBlue's statement is correct is irrelevant.* Fact is, the error did not affect the outcome of the game.* Ngayon, kung gusto ang decision ng board ay iaward sa La Salle ang game dahil sa technicality na WALANG KINALAMAN SA FINAL SCORE (if anything, La Salle pa ang nag-benefit), bahala sila pero magmumukha lang tanga ang La Salle at UAAP board.


muddatrucker, mukhang walang alam sa basketball yang cub na yan. pagpasensiyahan mo na.

jembengzon
07-29-2007, 01:15 PM
well guys, let's all just chill. *it's with the uaap committee/commissioner / board now, so we'll know what the decision is in a few days. *this discussion isn't getting productive from both sides, so while we're all very passionate and firm about each other's respective stands on this issue, let's keep it with a certain amount of civility and respect for each other, and agree to disagree, lest this home of ours - and it belongs to all hardcore basketball fans, of all schools - turn out into pex or some other nonsensical site.

moving forward, both coaches are smart motivators, and i know both have probably played out scenarios for their teams with different respective outcomes. *I think both realize that this could be the lightning rod that could turn their respective seasons for better or for worse. *so what and how do you think each coach is going to use this for their teams advantage ? * :) *

Jeep
07-29-2007, 01:30 PM
if any of you guys heard TJ manotoc's explanation of this whole protest thingy after halftime of the UE-UP game, it will be clear what the sequence of events would be in the next few days. those who heard and feel i may have missed out on some of the details should feel free to add and/or correct what i've put in here.

but going by what i heard yesterday, this much is clear for the next week or so:

1. lasal has filed its protest with fr. de sagun of UST, they being this year's hosts. (funny, but the facsimile to which berdengebak's post in atenista. net is linked had mr. buenaventura's sig, he being the lasall rep in the UAAP board, but the main signatory, franz pumaren, didn't sign the thing. cheesenose had an excellent answer for that, and i will leave you to visit atenista.net for his witty repartee.)

2. fr. de sagun will refer this matter directly to UAAP commish ed cordero. he will be the main, but not the final, decision-maker. he will look at the rule as stated, look at the precedents mentioned, and decide one way or the other, including possible sanctions, if any.

3. commish cordero will then have to inform the board about his decision. the board will then vote to affirm or reject the commish's decision without the participation of the two affected schools.

4. all this should happen within 7 calendar days.

all told, this should be a very interesting week for all of us.

personally, i'll hold this entire lasal community to their word that they win on the basketball court and not in the board room or some other court. now it appears, their word is no good.

Howard the Duck
07-29-2007, 01:38 PM
play doesn't begin until the ball is inbounded, that is, it is passed to a player inside the court.

atenean_blooded
07-29-2007, 01:52 PM
play doesn't begin until the ball is inbounded, that is, it is passed to a player inside the court.


Does the game clock have to start running?

irateluvmachine
07-29-2007, 04:33 PM
i hate to say this, being a DLSU alumnus, since i wasn't at the game, and didn't even watch it on TV...but i agree with a lot of the sentiments posted by the blue community.

coach franz & co. should quit b1tching and focus on winning more games. it would've been all moot and academic anyways, as previously pointed out. basing on the boxscores, laterre was virtually useless during the game...2 TO's and one foul in one minute were his only stats. having both foreigners on the court on the same time during that game would NOT have made a difference.

just trying to be realistic here...hope i don't get a flurry of green arrows flying my way...pero tama si jembengzon, chill lang tayo, let's not turn this into a PEx-style bashfest...and let the uaap board decide. \/

PeterPaulMario
07-29-2007, 05:57 PM
What's the principle behind the rule disallowing two non-Pinoys to play at the same?

The prohibition on fielding two non-Pinoy players at the same was intended to level the playing field in favor of schools who are not capable of recruiting non-Pinoys or do not have the network to recruit the same.

That's the principle behind that rule.

By leveling the playing field, in street parlance, huwag malamangan ang teams na di kaya mag-recruit ng foreign players.

Now, assume Ateneo commited an infraction and in effect officially had Zion and Kirk "on court" when play resumed.

Questions -

Nakalamang ba ang Ateneo?

Did it affect the outcome of the game?

PeterPaulMario
07-29-2007, 06:08 PM
IMO, Cordero's background as a player will make him render a decision and the subsequent recommended action to the Board NOT favorable to DLSUs protest.

The man was a player. He knows how games should be decided. He knows the "infraction" did not affect the outcome of the game.

Unless the rule book says an "automatic forfeiture is warranted", then he doesn't have much discretion on this.

So, what does the rulebook say on this?

Howard the Duck
07-29-2007, 09:15 PM
play doesn't begin until the ball is inbounded, that is, it is passed to a player inside the court.


Does the game clock have to start running?
The game clock runs once a person other than the inbounder touches the ball inbounds.

atenean_blooded
07-29-2007, 09:28 PM
The game clock runs once a person other than the inbounder touches the ball inbounds.


But does that affect when two players are said to be "playing together"?

Wingman
07-29-2007, 09:43 PM
La Salle placed the game under protest because it is obliged to do so. Whether the game will be reversed in our favor is moot and academic to us. Most of the people I've talked to doesn't mind the win of Ateneo to remain as it is. What is being contested here is the applicability of the rule. It should apply to all or none at all.

BTW, the Ateneans cheered against us very loudly earlier. We won. Then they were beaten by FEU.

Ang bilis ng karma. Hyuk hyuk hyuk!

How sweet it is!

bchoter
07-29-2007, 11:17 PM
OT:

Fr. De Sagon and Mrs. Francisco must be very happy with this latest 'drama' with the spotlight veering away fom their booboos.

cub
07-29-2007, 11:44 PM
La Salle placed the game under protest because it is obliged to do so. Whether the game will be reversed in our favor is moot and academic to us. Most of the people I've talked to doesn't mind the win of Ateneo to remain as it is. What is being contested here is the applicability of the rule. It should apply to all or none at all.

BTW, the Ateneans cheered against us very loudly earlier. We won. Then they were beaten by FEU.

Ang bilis ng karma. Hyuk hyuk hyuk!

How sweet it is!


oo nga. i saw them on TV. buti nga. :P

muddatrucker
07-29-2007, 11:59 PM
La Salle placed the game under protest because it is obliged to do so. Whether the game will be reversed in our favor is moot and academic to us. Most of the people I've talked to doesn't mind the win of Ateneo to remain as it is. What is being contested here is the applicability of the rule. It should apply to all or none at all.

BTW, the Ateneans cheered against us very loudly earlier. We won. Then they were beaten by FEU.

Ang bilis ng karma. Hyuk hyuk hyuk!

How sweet it is!


oo nga. i saw them on TV. buti nga. :P

OH MY GOD WE LOST A GAME!!!! NOW MY WHOLE WORLD IS COLLAPSING!!!

WE WILL FILE A PROTEST.

joelex
07-30-2007, 01:28 AM
just a comment..did black really mean kirk will sub for zai?

if you check out their lineup at that exact time, it was salamat, reyes, tiu, zion and arao

si kirk enters for zai? salamat, jai, tiu, and kirk all together at the same time?

cmon, as an fan, that would be hard to believe. some coaches want small ball but that 4some together just didnt seem right....

this, however, doesnt take anything away from ateneo's win.

animoateneo
07-30-2007, 06:05 AM
oh come on muddatrucker, you know that's not our style... ;D

truth be told FEU beat us soundly. you guys should know, you nearly lost to them. but its FEU's bragging rights not yours. we lost to a green team alright but not La Salle.

nightowl
07-30-2007, 07:00 AM
If Black realized the mistake and wanted to pull out Kirk, why not inform the table officials or send a player to sub? The answer is: the ball had been thrown in so he just pulled Kirk out when Kirk got to him, and Jai ran onto the court from the bench.

IF THE BALL WAS NOT IN PLAY, he could have taken Kirk out properly, and they would not have been given a technical for the surreptitious manner in which Jai was inserted into the game. Only 4 players on the court? Of course, he physically pulled out Kirk, that's why, and at that time the ball was already in the frontcourt, seconds had passed from the time the ball was inbounded in La Salle's back court.

Isa pa, on Kirk subbing for Zion-this is funny! He had just put in Salamat for Monfort; he was putting back his guard starters, so Kirk subbed for Jai. In fact, after the next play, JOBE comes in for ZION. Kirk was on the bench (already, after stepping off the court), why did he not sub for Zion then?

Another excuse-it did not affect the outcome of the game! Hey, ano nga ba? If there was no infraction in the first place, why the slew of excuses!!! Why don't we make fun of all the rules of the UAAP (and hey, why not ALL RULES/LAWS, TOO) by breaking them WITHOUT AFFECTING ANY OUTCOME. Okay pala yon! You can steal, as long as you return it before it affects anyone, ok lang yon.

Whether we like it or not, the rules are there TO BE FOLLOWED. If they're broken, one has to pay the price.

kryptonite
07-30-2007, 07:20 AM
Isa lang naman ang tanong dyan e...did Ateneo field 2 foreign players at the same time? It does not matter if it affected the game or not! Sa rules and regulations ng UAAP...NO TWO FOREIGNERS CAN SIMULTANEOUSLY PLAY AT THE SAME TIME IN THE SAME GAME!!! Walang nakalagay na...IT MUST AFFECT THE RESULT OF THE GAME!

Yun lang ang dapat pag-usapan. Yung palusot ni Norman Black na it did not affect the complexion of the game, eh, palusot ng mga gustong lumusot sa isang gusot.

admu_addict
07-30-2007, 07:23 AM
Isa lang naman ang tanong dyan e...did Ateneo field 2 foreign players at the same time? It does not matter if it affected the game or not! Sa rules and regulations ng UAAP...NO TWO FOREIGNERS CAN SIMULTANEOUSLY PLAY AT THE SAME TIME IN THE SAME GAME!!! Walang nakalagay na...IT MUST AFFECT THE RESULT OF THE GAME!

Yun lang ang dapat pag-usapan. Yung palusot ni Norman Black na it did not affect the complexion of the game, eh, palusot ng mga gustong lumusot sa isang gusot.


edi dapat pala panalo ateneo noon nung naglaro sabay ang magkapatid na lago.

kryptonite
07-30-2007, 07:27 AM
When DLSU's won finals game in 1991 against FEU was forfeited because the Archer's TonyBoy Espinosa failed to leave the playing court due to five fouls, the clock did not even moved when the table officials realized the infraction. Kung tutuusin, ang table officials ang may kasalanan. Now did that affect the complexion of the game? Only FEU and the UAAP knows for sure. So there must be a precedent somewhere.

In Ateneo's case, the ball was already inbounded and already in play when Black suddenly yanked Long out of the playing court when he realized his blunder. Anyway, whatever the decision of the UAAP board, DLSU really lost the game but the principle of right vs wrong is in question here.

kryptonite
07-30-2007, 07:28 AM
If there ever was an infraction concerning the Lago brothers, protests could have been made as soon as that happened. Alam naman natin laging dehado ang DLSU sa UAAP board.

admu_addict
07-30-2007, 07:43 AM
if it wasn't in effect, then the protest shouldn't have been allowed to be filed in the first place. di naman iffile yun kung walang basis.

and puhleeze, stop with the UAAP Board is biased against lasalle defense mechanism.

blue scorpion
07-30-2007, 07:59 AM
When DLSU's won finals game in 1991 against FEU was forfeited because the Archer's TonyBoy Espinosa failed to leave the playing court due to five fouls, the clock did not even moved when the table officials realized the infraction. Kung tutuusin, ang table officials ang may kasalanan. Now did that affect the complexion of the game? Only FEU and the UAAP knows for sure. So there must be a precedent somewhere.



Akala ko ba, rematch ang decision ng game na iyon. Nadefault lang noong hindi naglaro ang La Salle sa rematch.

kryptonite
07-30-2007, 08:01 AM
if it wasn't in effect, then the protest shouldn't have been allowed to be filed in the first place. di naman iffile yun kung walang basis.

and puhleeze, stop with the UAAP Board is biased against lasalle defense mechanism.


Puhleeze...kung walang mali ginawa ang Ateneo, eh, di wala! Wag mangatog mga tuhod nyo kasi kung walang basis yung protesta, ibabasura lang naman ang protesta ng La Salle. Joke lang! Personally, wala na akong pakialam kung may mangyari sa protesta, baka sakali lang. Talo naman talaga ang La Salle sa laro so sa 2nd round na lang ulit.

kryptonite
07-30-2007, 08:05 AM
When DLSU's won finals game in 1991 against FEU was forfeited because the Archer's TonyBoy Espinosa failed to leave the playing court due to five fouls, the clock did not even moved when the table officials realized the infraction. Kung tutuusin, ang table officials ang may kasalanan. Now did that affect the complexion of the game? Only FEU and the UAAP knows for sure. So there must be a precedent somewhere.



Akala ko ba, rematch ang decision ng game na iyon. Nadefault lang noong hindi naglaro ang La Salle sa rematch.




Rematch nga ang decision. Yung panalo ng La Salle was nullified due to the technicality. My mistake of the term forfeited.

gfy
07-30-2007, 08:23 AM
Although wala ako dito noon, iba naman ata yun Espinosa case compared dito sa Lago/Long case. I would have wanted Black to have not mentioned that it didn't affect the outcome of the game. Tama na yun that Long and Zi (or Zai) didn't PLAY together. And the Lago case is the precedent. Black admitted he made a mistake but that doesn't mean that the Jai/Zi confusion isn't true. Of course it isn't the table's fault. Their attention should have been called immediately to correct the error. With the Lago precedent, I think Cordero/Technical committee will have no choice but to deny the protest. Will DLSU then elevate it to the Board?

Howard the Duck
07-30-2007, 09:13 AM
The game clock runs once a person other than the inbounder touches the ball inbounds.


But does that affect when two players are said to be "playing together"?
Here is the official FIBA rule for the matter:
19.3 Procedure
19.3.1 Only a substitute has the right to request a substitution. He (not the coach or assistant coach) shall go to the scorer’s table and ask clearly for a substitution, making the proper conventional sign with his hands or by sitting on the substitution chair. He must be ready to play immediately.
19.3.2 A substitution request may be cancelled only before the scorekeeper's signal has sounded for such a request.
19.3.3 As soon as a substitution opportunity begins the scorekeeper shall sound his signal to notify the officials that a request for a substitution has been made.
19.3.4 The substitute shall remain outside the boundary line until the official gives the substitution signal and beckons him to enter the playing court.
19.3.5 The player who has been substituted is permitted to go directly to his team bench without reporting either to the scorekeeper or the official.

---
If the scorekeeper's signal sounded (yung horn tuwing time out pero mas maikli), the substitution took place and they played together na.

Sam Miguel
07-30-2007, 09:19 AM
^^^ But is THIS what the UAAP follows and do they follow this to the letter?

Sam Miguel
07-30-2007, 09:40 AM
To my knowledge NABRO refs and the UAAP consider a ball "dead" until such time as the refs indicate that play is ready to resume.

Normally in the case of substitutions, a ball remains dead until the player coming in has taken to the court and the player replaced has left. It would of course be ridiculous not to mention against the rules to have six or four players on the court as a general rule.

To me therefore the question is simply: Was the ball dead or "live" when Kirk Long substituted for some one (whether it was Zion or Jai is yet another matter still). When Long indicated to the table that he was subbing for some one, and the table signaled the refs that Long was indeed coming in for some body, then the ball in that particular situation was obviously dead. One cannot come in and sub when the ball is live. The ball generally becomes live again once the sub has been completed and the refs indicate outright that the play resumes; this in sum is what every one saw: the ball was still DEAD. The "two foreigners prohibition rule" does not come into play during dead ball situations. Ergo: the rule was NOT violated.

Long NEVER entered the court because he obviousy saw that an error was made and he is well aware of the rule prohibiting him and Zion Laterre form playing on the floor at the same time. Again, at this time the ball was still dead, i.e. the refs had not indicated that play had already resumed, since they were waiting for Long to enter the game so that an inbound could be made already. This is pretty much a standard thing that refs do: wait until the sub is in before allowing the ball to be inbound. In this case NO inbound was made, since the refs and the table were trying to clear up the substitution. Reyes, having also realized the situation checked back in without telling the table, perhaps assuming that since this was a subsitution not allowed under the rules then he should just simply return to the floor, kind of like those mistake subs some teams make when they try to make a sub during a live ball situation and refs call the player who sat back into the game.

Now unless someone can show actual video footage that Long and Laterre had in fact played together on the floor even for just one second then that is a different case. But since there seems to be no such physical evidence then the best thing to do is simply to LET IT GO.

I know this is an Ateneo-Lasalle game and the stakes are higher, everything is different, yada-yada-yada...

Speaking strictly for myself I say: LEAVE IT ON THE COURT. You lost on the playing court then exact payback on the playing court.

oca
07-30-2007, 09:47 AM
Base on news reports, there is an admission on the part of Black that there was a mistake.

Now, no one here- those familiar with the “Lago Rule”- has stated that that violation merits a ”specific post-game sanction”; e.g. outright forfeiture or outright replay.

Yes, may mali at dapat may katapat na penalty.

But taking into account the circumstances, kahit saang anggulo ko tignan, hindi makatwiran ang forfeiture o replay. Excessive.

Now, the protest letter essentially asks for a “review”. Not just of the "incident" but also the pertinent and applying rules.

Hence, sa tulad kong sumusubaybay sa laro ng liga, I welcome the protest for it will put to test the Rule and define its limits and corresponding application.

But in this case, I just don’t believe the game’s outcome will be or should be altered.

jollibeeaddict
07-30-2007, 09:50 AM
mukhang hindi na talaga matatapos ito. sa basketball court na lang kasi ito pag-usapan. may second round pa naman.

greencm
07-30-2007, 10:14 AM
It was very clear that ball was in play when Jai darted from the bench and ADMU officials physically pulled Long off the court. No, it wasn't the barker's fault that he heard Jai instead of Zai. One shouldn't suppose they know their nicknames. They should mentione Laterre or the players' number or something. ADMU officials should have realized the announcement error.

It's funny how several parties have mentioned that ballgames are decided on-court. Why not just admit to the infraction and face the consequences. I believe the DLSU team has moved-on moreso with its win yesterday. A loss-reversal would only be gravy.

Howard the Duck
07-30-2007, 10:16 AM
^^^ But is THIS what the UAAP follows and do they follow this to the letter?
The UAAP follows virtually every FIBA rule except for the court dimensions. karamihan kasi rectangle, hindi trapezoid ang key

Wang-Bu
07-30-2007, 10:18 AM
Mag-one on one na lang sina Franz at Black! ;D

Lusutan, 5-10-15. ;D

gfy
07-30-2007, 10:34 AM
Referees lately have been giving the ball to the inbounder kahit na wala pa yun kabilang team o kulang. Letran was still in a huddle kahit nag-buzzer na so Mapua scored unmolested. Kung medyo meron man delay - sa pagpasok or whatever*-binibigay na rin ng ref ang bola sa inbounder. Pareho ang refs sa NCAA at UAAP. In this case, Long hesitated to come in but the refs thought na pumapasok na si Long kaya binigay na ang bola sa inbounder.

nightowl
07-30-2007, 10:41 AM
Referees lately have been giving the ball to the inbounder kahit na wala pa yun kabilang team o kulang. Letran was still in a huddle kahit nag-buzzer na so Mapua scored unmolested. Kung medyo meron man delay - sa pagpasok or whatever* binibigay na rin ng ref ang bola sa inbounder. Pareho ang refs sa NCAA at UAAP. In this case, Long hesitated to come in but the refs thought na pumapasok na si Long kaya binigay na ang bola sa inbounder.

Hesitated or not, he subbed for Jai. He was never replaced by anyone, so he was part of the Ateneo 5 on the court. If they had known that they had committed an infraction/violation, and the ball was dead, why did they not inform the table officials?

The fact is, the ball was live, they realized their mistake and tried to pull a fast one-pull Kirk off the floor and sneak Jai back in.

The dvd's are going to make trhe rounds, but you can check them throught archerpride.com and youtube. No need to argue as the facts are plain to see.

Jeep
07-30-2007, 10:58 AM
Base on news reports, there is an admission on the part of Black that there was a mistake.

Now, no one here- those familiar with the “Lago Rule”- has stated that that violation merits a ”specific post-game sanction”; e.g. outright forfeiture or outright replay.

Yes, may mali at dapat may katapat na penalty.

But taking into account the circumstances, kahit saang anggulo ko tignan, hindi makatwiran ang forfeiture o replay. Excessive.

Now, the protest letter essentially asks for a “review”. Not just of the "incident" but also the pertinent and applying rules.

Hence, sa tulad kong sumusubaybay sa laro ng liga, I welcome the protest for it will put to test the Rule and define its limits and corresponding application.

But in this case, I just don’t believe the game’s outcome will be or should be altered.




mismo, sir oca. if there is no post-game sanction, why call for one now? and who is lasal to legislate now on this all by their lonesome? they have some nerve, coming out of a year's suspension, to be calling for heads to roll or game results to be reversed.

the actual penalty has already been served, on court: two free throws plus possession given to lasall. at ganun pa rin ang kinauwian ng laro: 80~77 pabor sa ateneo.

hayaan na. tapos na. talo na. sa uulitin na lang. bilog naman ang bola, makakabawi sila kung gugustuhin nila

but like you, the policy wonk in me wants to look at the pros and cons of this lago rule. the rationale for this rule may no longer exist, as various factors now come into play that have significantly narrowed the gap between locals and foreigners in the physicality and athleticism they bring to the game. more importantly, we may be merely burdening ourselves with so many rules like this, the soc rivera rule, the mac cardona rule, the jai reyes rule, ad nauseam. a review should therefore please even the the lasallites and their very disturbing pharisaical aproach of insisting on the letter and not the spirit of the law. but if there are any such sanctions in the manner that the lasallites insist on foisting us all, they will be applied on subsequent games -- not on this one.

gfy
07-30-2007, 11:15 AM
Nightowl - I was just stating what actually happened. Whether Long PLAYED together or not with Zi bahala na si Batman dun.

GreenArrows
07-30-2007, 11:19 AM
Nightowl - I was just stating what actually happened. Whether Long PLAYED together or not with Zi bahala na si Batman dun.

Gfy, baka di si Batman. Baka si Robin. Hehehehehe Uragon kang mahray! Garo ako. Hahahaha

eustacia
07-30-2007, 11:23 AM
the actual penalty has already been served, on court: two free throws plus possession given to lasall. at ganun pa rin ang kinauwian ng laro: 80~77 pabor sa ateneo.

The freethrows were given as penalty for Jai Reyes entering the court without clearing with the table officials. It’s a different offense from fielding in two foreign players at the same time.

The rule sucks, truly (I mean what happened if the officials’ attention were alerted during the game? Would they have stopped play and just forfeited?). But it’s how the rule stands now, and unless it’s changed, then it has to be followed. Whether or not the rule is still relevant doesn’t really matter.

greencm
07-30-2007, 11:35 AM
Let's just all wait for the final verdit.

From the Philippine Star:

Sports
Black, Pumaren trade barbs on row

Monday, July 30, 2007
There’s a word war going on between coaches Norman Black and Franz Pumaren.

Black, of Ateneo, said he finds no merit in the La Salle protest, and that the infraction that took place in the second quarter of last Thursday’s game “had no effect” on the final outcome.

“The game was won on the court,” Black said yesterday as he warded off possible effects of the La Salle protest, including a forfeiture of the Blue Eagles’ 80-77 overtime win over the Green Archers.

“They’re just trying to use the technicality to reverse the outcome of the game,” added Black who took the blame in almost fielding their two foreign players, Zion Laterre and Kirk Long, at the same time.

It’s against the UAAP rule, that’s why Black said he immediately corrected the mistake by pulling out Long even before the game, played before an overflow crowd at the Big Dome, resumed.

“Is there any merit on their protest? From my point of view there is none because Zai and Kirk did not play together, and it did not have any effect on the game,” the Ateneo coach said.

The matter is now in the hands of UAAP commissioner Ed Cordero who will soon make a decision that can either be approved or disapproved by the technical committee and the board.

Pumaren then took his turn talking to the media, and questioning Ateneo’s stand on the issue.

“If we didn’t see anything, we wouldn’t have filed the protest. We want the truth to come out. There are different versions. There’s a pirated version,” he said.

The La Salle coach said it’s a very bad idea to say that the infraction had no effect on the final outcome.

“That’s a very good question whoever raised that. If that’s the case, then I can use my two foreign players in the first half because it does not have any effect on the game. Am I right?” he asked.

“Does it mean I can field both my foreign players at the same time until the third quarter when it does not have any effect on the game? Then let’s just change the rule,” he added.

Looking back, Black said he made a mistake when Long substituted Jai Reyes midway in the second quarter when the American was told to come in for Zion Laterre, an Australian.

“I thought I told him (Long) to come in for Zion instead of Jai. That’s what we call Zion – Zai. But immediately when the barker announced the substitution we recalled Kirk back to the bench,” Black said.

“Come on. Laterre is playing the No. 4 position. Does he mean Long will play that position. I’ve been exposed to basketball a long time,” Pumaren countered. – Abac Cordero

gameface_one
07-30-2007, 11:43 AM
Ateneo coach asks: Is there merit in protest?



By NICK GIONGCO
mb.com.ph



THE SUBSTITUTION boo-boo committed by Ateneo had no effect on the outcome of its won game against La Salle last week even as Blue Eagles coach Norman Black admitted that “I take the blame for the wrong substitution.”


"Is there a merit in their protest? From my point of view there is none because we did not play with Long and Laterre and it had no effect on the game at all. Their (La Salle’s) point of view? That’s their point of view and I am not going to try to argue with their point of view and obviously it’s not the same as mine," said Black.

In a letter forwarded to UAAP President Fr. Ermito de Sagun of host Santo Tomas and league Commissioner Ed Cordero, La Salle claimed that the two were on the court when play resumed late in the second quarter which is a violation of a league rule that prohibits a team from fielding two foreign players at the same time on the court.

Lattere is an Australian small forward, while Long is an American shooting guard.

The Eagles won that game in overtime, 80-77, thus handing the over-rated La Salle squad its second straight loss.

"So we made a mistake when we substituted him and immediately when the barker announced it, we recalled Kirk back to the bench. We did not allow him to play in the game. We immediately called him and told him to come back to the bench that’s why you’d noticed, when the game started, we only had four players on the floor," said Black, who is in his third year as mentor.

"The problem is, in the ABS-CBN tape, you can’t see whether he had one big toe on the floor or if his heel was on the floor. When the tape came back on, he (Long) was ready to sit down on the bench," said Black. "As far as we are concerned, a mistake was made and we recalled him back to the bench so this means we actually decided to play with four players which is not illegal and it actually became illegal when Jai Reyes ran back to the court that’s why we were issued a technical and penalized for it and they retained the basketball."

"The game was won on the basketball court. They (La Salle) know that the two players did not play together. They realized that but I guess they’re trying to use a technicality to reverse the outcome," said Black.

Cordero and the technical committee headed by UP representative Kiko Diaz are going to review the merits of the case today and the decision of the commissioner and the technical committee will be submitted to the UAAP board.

The UAAP board, however, has the final say on the matter as Cordero’s findings would only be recommendatory.

atenean_blooded
07-30-2007, 11:58 AM
Here is the official FIBA rule for the matter:
19.3 Procedure
19.3.1 Only a substitute has the right to request a substitution. He (not the coach or assistant coach) shall go to the scorer’s table and ask clearly for a substitution, making the proper conventional sign with his hands or by sitting on the substitution chair. He must be ready to play immediately.
19.3.2 A substitution request may be cancelled only before the scorekeeper's signal has sounded for such a request.
19.3.3 As soon as a substitution opportunity begins the scorekeeper shall sound his signal to notify the officials that a request for a substitution has been made.
19.3.4 The substitute shall remain outside the boundary line until the official gives the substitution signal and beckons him to enter the playing court.
19.3.5 The player who has been substituted is permitted to go directly to his team bench without reporting either to the scorekeeper or the official.

---
If the scorekeeper's signal sounded (yung horn tuwing time out pero mas maikli), the substitution took place and they played together na.


There's nothing in rules 19.3.1-1.3.5 that says anything about the horn or signal. All that's here is the procedure for a substitution.

oca
07-30-2007, 12:27 PM
mismo, sir oca. if there is no post-game sanction, why call for one now? and who is lasal to legislate now on this all by their lonesome? they have some nerve, coming out of a year's suspension, to be calling for heads to roll or game results to be reversed.

the actual penalty has already been served, on court: two free throws plus possession given to lasall. at ganun pa rin ang kinauwian ng laro: 80~77 pabor sa ateneo.

hayaan na. tapos na. talo na. sa uulitin na lang. bilog naman ang bola, makakabawi sila kung gugustuhin nila

but like you, the policy wonk in me wants to look at the pros and cons of this lago rule. the rationale for this rule may no longer exist, as various factors now come into play that have significantly narrowed the gap between locals and foreigners in the physicality and athleticism they bring to the game. more importantly, we may be merely burdening ourselves with so many rules like this, the soc rivera rule, the mac cardona rule, the jai reyes rule, ad nauseam. a review should therefore please even the the lasallites and their very disturbing pharisaical aproach of insisting on the letter and not the spirit of the law. but if there are any such sanctions in the manner that the lasallites insist on foisting us all, they will be applied on subsequent games -- not on this one.


There's the fun part.

If the rule, as currently written, provides for no specific penalties after the game has been completed, then the matter is left to the discretion of...who else...the BOARD!

Yan ang tunay na suspense thriller!

Panatag ang kalooban ko na ang recommendation ni Cordero ay magiging katanggap-tanggap sa sino mang hindi maka-asul o maka-berde. Pero may precedent na sa UAAP, nagdesisyon ang Board na wala sa recommendation na ibinigay ng Kume.

Ganoon ang takbo ng usapan duon...kung ano ang pakiramdam nila ng gumising sila sa umaga, yun ang batayan ng desisyon nila!

Exciting di ba?

Sa miron na tulad ko, the reading and subsequent application of this Rule is what is important.

I take the protest as an opportunity to define the Rule and not necessarily alter the results of the game. If they find the provisions insufficient in addressing the situation, then no sanction should be imposed. Hence, the penalty clause will have to be prospective.

Kung walang nakasaad, di pwedeng pag-usapan, dahil that will be discretionary. Mali yun. Kung walang nakasaad , walang pwedeng ipataw.

Unfair?

Live with it! Problema kasi sa UAAP, daming bawal, pero kulang sa implementing rules. Very general ang terms. Would you agree to a case by case discussion of possible penalties for every case that arises?

chocoks77
07-30-2007, 12:48 PM
Ano kaya ang feeling ng nanalo sa papel hindi sa court? Ako bilang isang manlalaro, iba pa rin ang feeling na nanalo sa basketball court hindi sa court of APPEALS. Baka bumabawi kayo sa ganitong paraan dahil pinabagsak ni Ford yung Indonesian niyo. Hayaan niyo na nga sila, para makapagyabang na mga lasalista na, Nanalo kami sa Ateneo-LaSalle game sa Board hindi sa Court

wolverine78ph
07-30-2007, 01:23 PM
oo nga minsan lang naman kayo manalo eh ;D ;D

chocoks77
07-30-2007, 01:29 PM
oo nga minsan lang naman kayo manalo eh ;D ;D


Tama ka kapatid. Minsan lang. Last year WALA nga kayong panalo kahit isa e. :o ::)

Jeep
07-30-2007, 01:43 PM
oo nga minsan lang naman kayo manalo eh* ;D ;D


Tama ka kapatid. Minsan lang. Last year WALA nga kayong panalo kahit isa e. :o ::)


sapul.

muddatrucker
07-30-2007, 01:56 PM
oo nga minsan lang naman kayo manalo eh ;D ;D


Tama ka kapatid. Minsan lang. Last year WALA nga kayong panalo kahit isa e. :o ::)

ZING~! :D

Eagle_Eyes
07-30-2007, 02:03 PM
oo nga minsan lang naman kayo manalo eh* ;D ;D


Tama ka kapatid. Minsan lang. Last year WALA nga kayong panalo kahit isa e. :o ::)


KABOOM!

MrGotti
07-30-2007, 02:10 PM
Pati nung 2005 wala rin kayong panalo dahil nandaya kayo! Hahahahahahahahaha! ;D

greencm
07-30-2007, 02:20 PM
I'm very certain DLSU will still have more UAAP basketball championships than most teams even if it misses the next 50 yrs so I'm not delving into the suspension crap. *We all know who admitted and faced the sanctions (even giving up a championship). *

Anyway, the decision will be meted out soon. *As someone said, let's all chill and move on afterwards. *It's good this thing happened early in the 1st rd and hopefully won't affect the final standings.

Kid Cubao
07-30-2007, 02:27 PM
If the scorekeeper's signal sounded (yung horn tuwing time out pero mas maikli), the substitution took place and they played together na.

ANO KAMO?

muddatrucker
07-30-2007, 02:28 PM
We all know who admitted and faced the sanctions (even giving up a championship).

Not Franz.

Lawdad
07-30-2007, 03:34 PM
Tingin ko, lasal is bent on pursuing this protest since they have been unmasked so early in the season. The pre-season and their first few games' cloak of invincibility that they seemd to have enjoyed and have encouraged has been stripped. No team that can contend for this year is in awe of lasal. Wala nang takot sa lasal!

Realistically, UE, ADMU, UST and FEU have the means s to actually keep lasal out of the Final 4, a dire scenarion that they cannot stomach and accept with grace. It's a very real possibility that compels them to grab at every "W" anywhere they can get it, whether on court or out of it.

jwsl
07-30-2007, 03:43 PM
classic lasal dickery.




No it was a classic ateneo STUPIDITY!!!

BigBlue
07-30-2007, 03:47 PM
No it was a classic ateneo STUPIDITY!!!


and with that, welcome to GAMEFACE, jwsl!

JonarSabilano
07-30-2007, 03:47 PM
classic lasal dickery.




No it was a classic ateneo STUPIDITY!!!


Wow. Congrats on your first post. *;D

muddatrucker
07-30-2007, 03:52 PM
classic lasal dickery.




No it was a classic ateneo STUPIDITY!!!

;D Nakakatuwa talaga kayo pag nagpopost kayo ng ganito.

chocoks77
07-30-2007, 03:55 PM
classic lasal dickery.




No it was a classic ateneo STUPIDITY!!!


Let's give jwsl a warm welcome here at gameface. JWSL - Just Welcome d Sore Loser

glock23
07-30-2007, 03:57 PM
oo nga minsan lang naman kayo manalo eh* ;D ;D


Tama ka kapatid. Minsan lang. Last year WALA nga kayong panalo kahit isa e. :o ::)


korek! parang baseball team ninyo ::) ::)

bluegirl
07-30-2007, 04:00 PM
korek! parang baseball team ninyo ::) ::)


buti na lang basketball ang usapan dito... kundi masasaktan ako sa hirit na ito. :P

muddatrucker
07-30-2007, 04:00 PM
oo nga minsan lang naman kayo manalo eh ;D ;D


Tama ka kapatid. Minsan lang. Last year WALA nga kayong panalo kahit isa e. :o ::)


korek! parang baseball team ninyo ::) ::)

Parang baseball team niyo rin.

at volleyball
at football
at track
et cetera

Jump_Shooter
07-30-2007, 04:02 PM
As Tiffany once sang, Children, behave.... Everybody, I agree with jembengzon: let's all chill out a bit. This is certainly a sensitive topic and worthy of a healthy discussion, but it serves no one, not the least gameface, if most of you continue with your childish behavior. Argue on the merits of the case. There are no points for name-calling or bashing.

Personally, I think Manila Standard's Reuel Vidal best summed it up: if ever, the letter of the law was broken, but not the spirit of the law. The no-two-foreigners-on-the-court-at-the-same-time rule is actually an offshoot of the rule limiting only two foreigners per team. The spirit of the law was to prevent any school from getting undue advantage over other schools who did not have the means or resources to recruit foreign players. The assumption here, though, is that most foreign players are physically more gifted than homgrown Pinoy ballers. I also assume that by "foreigner" the type of player the rule's proponent had in mind was FEU's super recruit Anthony Williams, who was so overpowering that he led the Tams to a three-peat (including a season sweep in '81), not some overrated player like Laterre (sorry, but that's the way I view him today after an Atenean friend of mine once described him as "going to be better than Rich Alvarez").

But here's something to ponder on: a referee called a technical foul on Ateneo for having only four players on the court. So is this an admission that Long was never on the court?

oca
07-30-2007, 04:30 PM
As Tiffany once sang, Children, behave.... Everybody, I agree with jembengzon: let's all chill out a bit. This is certainly a sensitive topic and worthy of a healthy discussion, but it serves no one, not the least gameface, if most of you continue with your childish behavior. Argue on the merits of the case. There are no points for name-calling or bashing.

Personally, I think Manila Standard's Reuel Vidal best summed it up: if ever, the letter of the law was broken, but not the spirit of the law. The no-two-foreigners-on-the-court-at-the-same-time rule is actually an offshoot of the rule limiting only two foreigners per team. The spirit of the law was to prevent any school from getting undue advantage over other schools who did not have the means or resources to recruit foreign players. The assumption here, though, is that most foreign players are physically more gifted than homgrown Pinoy ballers. I also assume that by "foreigner" the type of player the rule's proponent had in mind was FEU's super recruit Anthony Williams, who was so overpowering that he led the Tams to a three-peat (including a season sweep in '81), not some overrated player like Laterre (sorry, but that's the way I view him today after an Atenean friend of mine once described him as "going to be better than Rich Alvarez").

But here's something to ponder on: a referee called a technical foul on Ateneo for having only four players on the court. So is this an admission that Long was never on the court?


The technical was for Jai Reyes' returning to the court without reporting to the official's table. If we have to be technical about it, iba yun sa "Long was never on the court".

Dark Knight
07-30-2007, 04:32 PM
I also assume that by "foreigner" the type of player the rule's proponent had in mind was FEU's super recruit Anthony Williams, who was so overpowering that he led the Tams to a three-peat (including a season sweep in '81),

Thank you very much for the info. Ive been looking for this guys name (hes a med student) from FEU who led the Tams to a 3peat from 81 to 83.

Are my years correct? *;D

Jump_Shooter
07-30-2007, 04:46 PM
As Tiffany once sang, Children, behave.... Everybody, I agree with jembengzon: let's all chill out a bit. This is certainly a sensitive topic and worthy of a healthy discussion, but it serves no one, not the least gameface, if most of you continue with your childish behavior. Argue on the merits of the case. There are no points for name-calling or bashing.

Personally, I think Manila Standard's Reuel Vidal best summed it up: if ever, the letter of the law was broken, but not the spirit of the law. The no-two-foreigners-on-the-court-at-the-same-time rule is actually an offshoot of the rule limiting only two foreigners per team. The spirit of the law was to prevent any school from getting undue advantage over other schools who did not have the means or resources to recruit foreign players. The assumption here, though, is that most foreign players are physically more gifted than homgrown Pinoy ballers. I also assume that by "foreigner" the type of player the rule's proponent had in mind was FEU's super recruit Anthony Williams, who was so overpowering that he led the Tams to a three-peat (including a season sweep in '81), not some overrated player like Laterre (sorry, but that's the way I view him today after an Atenean friend of mine once described him as "going to be better than Rich Alvarez").

But here's something to ponder on: a referee called a technical foul on Ateneo for having only four players on the court. So is this an admission that Long was never on the court?


The technical was for Jai Reyes' returning to the court without reporting to the official's table. If we have to be technical about it, iba yun sa "Long was never on the court".



I was watching on TV, so I really did not hear what the barker said when announcing the T. But prior to that, the camera zoomed in on the lead ref, Black and Pumaren discussing exactly what just transpired. I coulnd't hear what the ref was telling Black, but Black clearly answered, "Is it a violation to have four players on the floor?", so I assume that was what the ref was pointing out. But if officially the T was for Reyes re-entering the game, then I stand corrected.




Thank you very much for the info. Ive been looking for this guys name (hes a med student) from FEU who led the Tams to a 3peat from 81 to 83.

Are my years correct? ;D

1979-81. UE won it in 1982. But FEU reclaimed the title in '83.

pablohoney
07-30-2007, 04:49 PM
I'm very certain DLSU will still have more UAAP basketball championships than most teams even if it misses the next 50 yrs so I'm not delving into the suspension crap. *We all know who admitted and faced the sanctions (even giving up a championship). *

Anyway, the decision will be meted out soon. *As someone said, let's all chill and move on afterwards. *It's good this thing happened early in the 1st rd and hopefully won't affect the final standings.




medyo iba ang dating nito sa akin ...* ;D *;D
ikaw na nga ang nagsabi eh .. chill and move on... ;)

blue scorpion
07-30-2007, 05:22 PM
As Tiffany once sang, Children, behave.... Everybody, I agree with jembengzon: let's all chill out a bit. This is certainly a sensitive topic and worthy of a healthy discussion, but it serves no one, not the least gameface, if most of you continue with your childish behavior. Argue on the merits of the case. There are no points for name-calling or bashing.

Personally, I think Manila Standard's Reuel Vidal best summed it up: if ever, the letter of the law was broken, but not the spirit of the law. The no-two-foreigners-on-the-court-at-the-same-time rule is actually an offshoot of the rule limiting only two foreigners per team. The spirit of the law was to prevent any school from getting undue advantage over other schools who did not have the means or resources to recruit foreign players. The assumption here, though, is that most foreign players are physically more gifted than homgrown Pinoy ballers. I also assume that by "foreigner" the type of player the rule's proponent had in mind was FEU's super recruit Anthony Williams, who was so overpowering that he led the Tams to a three-peat (including a season sweep in '81), not some overrated player like Laterre (sorry, but that's the way I view him today after an Atenean friend of mine once described him as "going to be better than Rich Alvarez").



Can you post his article here? I have to read his thoughts on this issue especially since I have viewed him as pro-La Salle.

Jump_Shooter
07-30-2007, 05:54 PM
Ateneo Fumbled the Ball by Reuel Vidal, Manila Standard
LA Salle versus Ateneo is not just a game, it's an event, an occasion to be
> celebrated. As a sportswriter, I felt so fortunate to cover the last game
> between these two bitter rivals last Thursday. In another classic
> battle to add to the storied La Salle-Ateneo rivalry, the Blue Eagles beat
> the Green Archers, 80-77, in overtime, in front of 15,000 screaming,
> feet-stomping fans, who shook the old Araneta Coliseum to its foundation. It
> was Ateneo's first victory over La Salle in three years. Unfortunately
> for Ateneo, the victory may well be overturned because Ateneo coach Norman
> Black fielded in Kirk Long in favor Jai Reyes in the second quarter while
> Ateneo's other foreign player, Zion Laterre, was still on the floor. There
> is a standing University Athletic Association of the Philippines rule that
> you can have two foreigners in your team as long as you don't field them in
> together. Ateneo contends that Long did not actually play with Laterre, because Long rushed
> out of the playing court, and Reyes returned, before play could resume.
> As far as I am concerned, the violation was committed the moment Long was
> officially substituted by the table officials. It's a shame, but Ateneo
> clearly fumbled the ball on this one. The spirit of the rule in this
> case was not violated. Clearly, having Long report to official's table while
> Laterre was on the playing floor does not give Ateneo any advantage at all.
> And clearly, Long and Laterre never actually played on the floor together.
> But the letter of the law was clearly violated because Long had already
> completed the substitution with the table officials and he was for all
> intents and purposes, already in the game. That's just one
> interpretation of the rules, of course. Today, UAAP commissioner Ed Cordero
> and league officials will decide on the issue and the decision will hog the
> sporting headlines for a while.

nightowl
07-30-2007, 05:56 PM
The more Black talks, the better for the protest.

He has now admitted it was his fault that Kirk subbed for Jai. that means, we no longer need to prove that indeed, Kirk came in for Jai. What he is saying is that Long and Laterre never played together.

When a player subs for another, that means he is part of the 5 on the court, until he is *substituted by another player. BTW, one cannot be substituted in the same dead ball situation; the time has to run before that player can be replaced. Even if he steps outside the line, he is still part of the 5 on the court.

That means, that for the so many seconds that the ball was dribbled down the court, a shot made, and Ateneo throwing the ball away thus a dead ball(and the table officials stopping the action due to Jai having sneaked in), Kirk Long and Laterre PLAYED together.

The rule also states that violation of the 2 foreigner rule means forfeiture of the game in question.

bluebruiser90
07-30-2007, 06:05 PM
I also assume that by "foreigner" the type of player the rule's proponent had in mind was FEU's super recruit Anthony Williams, who was so overpowering that he led the Tams to a three-peat (including a season sweep in '81),

Thank you very much for the info. Ive been looking for this guys name (hes a med student) from FEU who led the Tams to a 3peat from 81 to 83.

Are my years correct? *;D


I remember that he was taking up nursing for his pre-med when he was with the Tams. Ex-US military, studying in the Philippines under the G.I. -Montgomery bill. Didn't know if he went all the way to med school though.

BigBlue
07-30-2007, 06:06 PM
He has now admitted it was his fault that Kirk subbed for Jai. that means, we no longer need to prove that indeed, Kirk came in for Jai. What he is saying is that Long and Laterre never played together.


when you say he admits fault, you can't automatically equate that to him admitting that he really intended to field in Kirk in place of Jai. he could be talking in the sense that it's his fault because he let it happen (he failed to make sure that zion was already out of the court before Kirk goes in), and not because he made it happen. magkaiba yun. no one will know for sure what Coach Norman's intentions were at that moment, whether he intended to get Zion out or if it was Jai he was really after.

shyboy
07-30-2007, 06:32 PM
oo nga minsan lang naman kayo manalo eh* ;D ;D


Tama ka kapatid. Minsan lang. Last year WALA nga kayong panalo kahit isa e. :o ::)


Tama ka kapatid. Last year, wala rin kaming talo. ;D

animoateneo
07-30-2007, 07:13 PM
oo nga minsan lang naman kayo manalo eh ;D ;D


Tama ka kapatid. Minsan lang. Last year WALA nga kayong panalo kahit isa e. :o ::)


Tama ka kapatid. Last year, wala rin kaming talo. ;D


actually if i remember correctly, your team A played our team B last year and LOST, so you can't say you had no losses. :P

Howard the Duck
07-30-2007, 07:15 PM
Here is the official FIBA rule for the matter:
19.3 Procedure
19.3.1 Only a substitute has the right to request a substitution. He (not the coach or assistant coach) shall go to the scorer’s table and ask clearly for a substitution, making the proper conventional sign with his hands or by sitting on the substitution chair. He must be ready to play immediately.
19.3.2 A substitution request may be cancelled only before the scorekeeper's signal has sounded for such a request.
19.3.3 As soon as a substitution opportunity begins the scorekeeper shall sound his signal to notify the officials that a request for a substitution has been made.
19.3.4 The substitute shall remain outside the boundary line until the official gives the substitution signal and beckons him to enter the playing court.
19.3.5 The player who has been substituted is permitted to go directly to his team bench without reporting either to the scorekeeper or the official.

---
If the scorekeeper's signal sounded (yung horn tuwing time out pero mas maikli), the substitution took place and they played together na.


There's nothing in rules 19.3.1-1.3.5 that says anything about the horn or signal. All that's here is the procedure for a substitution.
after re-reading that, once a substitution is requested, the substitution was conducted

Raging Blue
07-30-2007, 09:11 PM
oo nga minsan lang naman kayo manalo eh ;D ;D


Tama ka kapatid. Minsan lang. Last year WALA nga kayong panalo kahit isa e. :o ::)


korek! parang baseball team ninyo ::) ::)


Hindi naman SUSPENDED ng isang taon :P

cub
07-30-2007, 09:33 PM
just a comment..did black really mean kirk will sub for zai?

if you check out their lineup at that exact time, it was salamat, reyes, tiu, zion and arao

si kirk enters for zai? salamat, jai, tiu, and kirk all together at the same time?

cmon, as an fan, that would be hard to believe. some coaches want small ball but that 4some together just didnt seem right....

this, however, doesnt take anything away from ateneo's win.




nako! mali ata ang palusot! huling huli na! :P

wolverine78ph
07-30-2007, 09:37 PM
unfortunately you guys are in the spotlight for lying ;D ;) look who is the LIAR

muddatrucker
07-30-2007, 09:42 PM
nako! mali ata ang palusot! huling huli na! :P




unfortunately you guys are in the spotlight for lying ;D ;) look who is the LIAR

Alam niyo kasi, kung binabasa mo yung more civilized discussion sa post na ito (minus the bashing from both sides), malalaman mo na hindi naman dineny na Norman Black na pinasok niya si Kirk for Jai.

gameface_one
07-31-2007, 07:35 AM
Board has final say on protest


By ABAC CORDERO
The Philippine Star

Commissioner Ed Cordero of the UAAP Monday started to dig deeper into the La Salle-Ateneo controversy, and said he may be ready to come up with a decision in two to three days.

"The process has just started. The decision may come out Wednesday or Thursday," said the commissioner, referring to the protest filed by La Salle after it lost to Ateneo last Thursday.

La Salle lost in overtime, 80-77, but placed the game under protest after the Blue Eagles allegedly fielded their two foreign players at the same time in the second period.

Under UAAP rules, teams with two allowable foreign players in their fold cannot field them both at the same time. A video footage apparently shows that Ateneo broke the rule – briefly or otherwise.

The commissioner is gathering the testimonies of game officials and others concerned. Then he will review the tape as long as needed for him to decide whether or not to uphold the protest.

His decision will be forwarded to the technical committee headed by UP’s Kiko Diaz. But again, the committee can only recommend it to the board which will have the final say.

"They can approve or disapprove my decision. The UAAP is different from the PBA where the decision of the commissioner is final," said the rookie commissioner.

Cordero said he had to go through the UAAP rules and guidelines over the weekend, especially since the issue involved is a first. This is the first time the UAAP allowed two foreign players in a team.

"What’s difficult here in the UAAP is that there is always a new commissioner," he said.

The practice, experts believe, is not good for the league, raising calls for the setting up of a permanent secretariat for the UAAP, a permanent commissioner, and permanent committees.

A 38-second Studio 23 clip available at www.youtube.com shows that the ball was already in play when Ateneo coach Norman Black tried to pull his American player, Kirk Long, out of the court.

Long was fielded in for Jai Reyes as announced by the game barker, unaware that Australian Zion Laterre, the other foreigner, is already on the court for Ateneo.

Here lies La Salle’s bone of contention. But Ateneo says otherwise, claiming that the ball was not yet in play, when they corrected the mistake by pulling out Long, and sending Reyes back in.

wolverine78ph
07-31-2007, 07:45 AM
well look at the youtube video and see if the ball was really in play ;)

anghusay
07-31-2007, 08:01 AM
what is the youtube link?

greencm
07-31-2007, 09:07 AM
http://youtube.com/watch?v=LeWq_5CLTks

Wang-Bu
07-31-2007, 10:08 AM
Ayan naman pala e.

MUKHANG GUILTY!

BigBlue
07-31-2007, 10:14 AM
unfortunately you guys are in the spotlight for lying ;D ;) look who is the LIAR


well, would you mind substantiating your post with facts? who lied? and what was lied about? do you have proof to the contrary?

Howard the Duck
07-31-2007, 10:28 AM
Ayan naman pala e.

MUKHANG GUILTY!
GUILTY as charged :D

shyboy
07-31-2007, 11:08 AM
oo nga minsan lang naman kayo manalo eh* ;D ;D


Tama ka kapatid. Minsan lang. Last year WALA nga kayong panalo kahit isa e. :o ::)


Tama ka kapatid.* Last year, wala rin kaming talo.* *;D


actually if i remember correctly, your team A played our team B last year and LOST, so you can't say you had no losses.* :P


We're in the UAAP sub-forum so that ain't included. :P

Kid Cubao
07-31-2007, 11:50 AM
if the protest is going to result in a forfeiture, fine with me. malinaw ang nakasaad sa UAAP rules.

if the protest is going to result in stiff sanctions short of a forfeiture, that's even more ok because we get to keep the win ;D

however, if the protest is going to result in a rematch, then the only viable conclusion is that the UAAP board voted with their pockets in mind.

shyboy
07-31-2007, 12:15 PM
if the protest is going to result in a forfeiture, fine with me. malinaw ang nakasaad sa UAAP rules.

if the protest is going to result in stiff sanctions short of a forfeiture, that's even more ok because we get to keep the win ;D

however, if the protest is going to result in a rematch, then the only viable conclusion is that the UAAP board voted with their pockets in mind.


Honestly, many from the La Salle community would rather have case #2. But given how things have gone so far, the uncalled for statements towards La Salle and the like, then maybe pushing for the dictates of the UAAP rulebook would be fine after all.

RockLobster
07-31-2007, 12:20 PM
Please do make the correction if I'm wrong. Watched Hardball last night and Bill Velasco said that the UAAP rule does state that having two foreign players on the playing court at the same is not allowed, but does not say what the sanctions or penalties would be if the rule is violated. Is this accurate?

If so, I can only assume that the provision neither discusses how situations of breaching the rule, i.e. violation cited during or after the game, should be dealt with. Only goes to show how haphazardly the UAAP board comes up with league rules.

admu_addict
07-31-2007, 12:37 PM
if there's one thing ateneans and lasallites agree on, it's the uaap boards' consistent incompetency.

whatever the ruling is, there should have been no speculation in the first place if they were more systematic in formulating rules.

Howard the Duck
07-31-2007, 12:38 PM
Please do make the correction if I'm wrong. Watched Hardball last night and Bill Velasco said that the UAAP rule does state that having two foreign players on the playing court at the same is not allowed, but does not say what the sanctions or penalties would be if the rule is violated. Is this accurate?

If so, I can only assume that the provision neither discusses how situations of breaching the rule, i.e. violation cited during or after the game, should be dealt with. Only goes to show how haphazardly the UAAP board comes up with league rules.
according to the ever reliable "Green Archer Radio", once the team fields in 2 foreigners at the same time, it is automatic forfeiture.

Pero sana rematch na lang :P

bluewing
07-31-2007, 12:43 PM
hindi na. ibigay na lang yung panalo.

if the board orders a replay, i hope the Blue Eagles just boycott the game and forfeit the win.

kesa gawin lang silang milking cow ng UAAP. tama na yung mga regularly scheduled Ateneo-lasal games during the season and (sometimes) the post-eliminations.

eustacia
07-31-2007, 12:45 PM
Please do make the correction if I'm wrong. Watched Hardball last night and Bill Velasco said that the UAAP rule does state that having two foreign players on the playing court at the same is not allowed, but does not say what the sanctions or penalties would be if the rule is violated. Is this accurate?


It's inaccurate. The rules call for forfeiture, unless they changed the rule from two seasons ago.

To avoid forfeiture, Ateneo must prove that Long and Laterre did not play together at the same time, which is the thrust of Ateneo’s argument I believe.

bit_bang_boom
07-31-2007, 03:16 PM
Mukhang anuman ang maging desisyon, kailangang linawin ang mga terms na ginagamit sa UAAP rules. Medyo malabo ang "playing".

RockLobster
07-31-2007, 05:11 PM
It's inaccurate.* The rules call for forfeiture, unless they changed the rule from two seasons ago.

To avoid forfeiture, Ateneo must prove that Long and Laterre did not play together at the same time, which is the thrust of Ateneo’s argument I believe.

Thanks for the correction eustacia.

So the question now is whether they were actually officially on the court at the same time. If barking out the substitution constitutes official entry of the player on the court--where such substition was acknowledged by the referee--and then we look at the tape which shows that that's exactly what happened, then they were officially on the court at the same time, right?

Problem with what happened is that the officials table should've been aware of the rule, that they should've recognized the violation then, and shouldn't have allowed the substitution in the first place. Anyway, I think it's useless to put the blame on anyone at this point. The effort now is towards resolving the issue. And for the benefit of both teams involved--in all honesty, I friggin' enjoyed that game, how it was played, how JV Casio and Jai Reyes played their hearts out--and the rest of the league, I hope the good commissioner and the board are guided well in their assessment and recommendation.

greencm
07-31-2007, 05:34 PM
It's inaccurate.* The rules call for forfeiture, unless they changed the rule from two seasons ago.

To avoid forfeiture, Ateneo must prove that Long and Laterre did not play together at the same time, which is the thrust of Ateneo’s argument I believe.

Thanks for the correction eustacia.

So the question now is whether they were actually officially on the court at the same time. If barking out the substitution constitutes official entry of the player on the court--where such substition was acknowledged by the referee--and then we look at the tape which shows that that's exactly what happened, then they were officially on the court at the same time, right?

Problem with what happened is that the officials table should've been aware of the rule, that they should've recognized the violation then, and shouldn't have allowed the substitution in the first place. Anyway, I think it's useless to put the blame on anyone at this point. The effort now is towards resolving the issue. And for the benefit of both teams involved--in all honesty, I friggin' enjoyed that game, how it was played, how JV Casio and Jai Reyes played their hearts out--and the rest of the league, I hope the good commissioner and the board are guided well in their assessment and recommendation.


I don't think it's fair to put the blame on the table officials. Their job, among others, is to tabulate stats. Team reps are supposed to be knowledgable of eligibility rules, etc.

A-boy97
07-31-2007, 05:53 PM
Ang mga ganitong insidente ang sumisira sa dangal at integridad ng liga at ng eskwelahan. Pinagmamalaking matatalino at edukado ang mga nagtapos sa la salle pero ang lumalabas sa ganitong protesta, mga bobo at gung gong ang galing sa taft. Kahit sinong marunong magbasketbol ang tanungin mo kung naglaro ba ng sabay si long at si latterre, isasagot sa iyo hindi! NAPAKALINAW NON!!!

Ang problema kasi, ang kikitid mag-isip ng iba. Nakakatawang nakakainis na mismong si coach pumaren ay gumamit ng rason na kung hindi naman nakalalamang at nakakapagbago ng laro ang pagpasok sa loob ng dalawang banyaga, eh di dapat pinalaro niya hanggang 3rd quarter yung 2 banyaga niya. Coach Pumaren, mag-isip ka naman, naturingan kang konsehal pero mga rason mo, ANG BOBO!!

Kitang kita na lumabas nga si Long sa court para maiwasan na magsabay sila ni zion. Simpleng simple!

Sa uaap board naman, isipin niyong mabuti kung anong klaseng mga batas ang ginagawa niyo. Sayang lang ang ginagastos niyo sa meeting kung puro palpak at parang hindi tunay na pinagnilayan ang mga alituntunin at patakarang pinatutupad ninyo. Gumamit lang kayo ng sentido komon! Kung hindi, ibigay niyo na lang sa mahihirap yung mga ginagastos niyo sa mga pagpulong niyo. May tunay na matutulungan pa kayo!

greencm
07-31-2007, 06:46 PM
I suppose one can substitute anytime during any regular weekday/weekend pick-up game. Heck, most players just walk during such games and we consider them 'playing'. But we're talking about the UAAP here and, sad to say, street rules aren't applied. Nope, no 'stupid' La Sallian is stooping to your level. You know who you are.

joelex
07-31-2007, 08:10 PM
Ang problema kasi, ang kikitid mag-isip ng iba.* Nakakatawang nakakainis na mismong si coach pumaren ay gumamit ng rason na kung hindi naman nakalalamang at nakakapagbago ng laro ang pagpasok sa loob ng dalawang banyaga, eh di dapat pinalaro niya hanggang 3rd quarter yung 2 banyaga niya. Coach Pumaren, mag-isip ka naman, naturingan kang konsehal pero mga rason mo, ANG BOBO!!





katangahan talaga ang sinabi ni pumaren. pa ami i right am i right pa. aminado na nga nagkamali ng di sinasadya ang ateneo coaching staff eh ganyan namang katangengotan na dahilan ang ibibigay ng pumaren na yan.

AM I RIGHT!! ;D ;D ;D

gameface_one
08-01-2007, 08:17 AM
Video clips back La Salle case

The Philippine Star

La Salle’s protest of its overtime loss to Ateneo last week took a new twist when video clips showed that the ball was indeed in play when two foreign players of Ateneo were seen inside the playing court.

A 38-second edited Studio 23 video released to the media Tuesday showed that the ball was already in play when Ateneo coach Norman Black pulled Kirk Long, an American, out of the playing court and Jai Reyes was ordered back into the game.

Long was fielded in for Reyes as announced by the game barker, unaware that Australian Zion Laterre, the other foreigner, was already on the court for Ateneo.

Under UAAP rules, no team is allowed to field two foreign players at the same time.

Black has earlier said that the two foreign players did not play at the same time and that the ball was not in play when they corrected the error.

Meanwhile, sources said similar dispute took place 16 seasons ago but it was Ateneo which filed a protest against La Salle, which was found to have fielded in brothers Elmer and Dwight Lago – then American citizens – at the same time.

The then UAAP board, citing the infraction didn’t affect the outcome of that match played on Sept. 7, 1991 won by La Salle, 79-75, denied the protest, according to the source who asked not to be identified.

In that game, the Lago brothers played for around 30 seconds but it was Ateneo, which scored two points against La Salle.

Fr. Raymond Hoelscher, then the Ateneo board member, filed the protest as he sought to reverse the outcome of the game.

State U’s Kiko Diaz, who chairs the league’s four-man technical committee, said he would comment on the Lago case only after commissioner Ed Cordero submits his final recommendation.

“I can’t comment about it just yet,” Diaz told The STAR Tuesday. “Besides, the technical committee reserves its inputs until the office of the commissioner has made the decision.”

On Monday, Cordero said he might be ready to come up with a decision in two to three days.

Bro. Bernie Oca, for his part, said the circumstances were different.

“At that time, table officials said substitutions were not yet completed and the referees did not hear them, that it was still a dead-ball situation,” said Oca. “Now the call was in play.” With a report from Joey Villar

nightowl
08-01-2007, 11:04 AM
Well, the media is giving this protest good coverage.

Looks like they are backing La Salle's case, too.

The Inquirer also has pics of the video showing Long being pulled off the court by Black while the ball was already in play, then Jai running in-just as La Salle said.

Clear as day!!!!

31gna
08-01-2007, 11:25 AM
pinagkakakitaan na naman ng kung sino sino ang situasyon... hehehe

Joescoundrel
08-01-2007, 11:33 AM
If a replay is ordered maybe they should just replay it up to the time Long came in, then it would be like turning back the hands of time...

*Submitted for your approval: Can you really turn back the hands of time? Is it poossible to undo what has already been done? Franz Pumaren is a college basketball coach trying to get back on the winning track. Against their archrival only victory is acceptable. But something goes wrong, as they always do in the Twilight Zone*

bluewing
08-01-2007, 12:26 PM
If a replay is ordered maybe they should just replay it up to the time Long came in, then it would be like turning back the hands of time...

*Submitted for your approval: Can you really turn back the hands of time? Is it poossible to undo what has already been done? Franz Pumaren is a college basketball coach trying to get back on the winning track. Against their archrival only victory is acceptable. But something goes wrong, as they always do in the Twilight Zone*



nununinu-nununinu-nununinuuuuuu....

irateluvmachine
08-01-2007, 12:48 PM
again, having laterre and long on the court at the same time would NOT have made a difference. laterre played a total of ONE MINUTE during the game, and had but two turnovers and a foul to his name.

i'm trying my best to back up my alma mater as they have filed this protest, but i still think they should have just let it pass...stop whining and start focusing on winning!!!

BigBlue
08-01-2007, 02:45 PM
Well, the media is giving this protest good coverage.

Looks like they are backing La Salle's case, too.

The Inquirer also has pics of the video showing Long being pulled off the court by Black while the ball was already in play, then Jai running in-just as La Salle said.

Clear as day!!!!


your point being?

again, what else is new? alam na ng ateneo lahat ng mga detalyeng yan.

MrGotti
08-01-2007, 04:13 PM
BigBlue, nagpapapansin lang yan! Dehins na natin patulan.

Jeep
08-01-2007, 05:33 PM
again, having laterre and long on the court at the same time would NOT have made a difference.* laterre played a total of ONE MINUTE during the game, and had but two turnovers and a foul to his name.*

i'm trying my best to back up my alma mater as they have filed this protest, but i still think they should have just let it pass...stop whining and start focusing on winning!!!


sir,

would that all lasallites think the way you do, we wouldn't be caught in this maelstrom right now. saludo po ako sa inyo!

if we can get back to just playing -- heck, even throw in the heckling and what-not (huwag lang mambabatok! ;D ) -- i'm sure we can bring a great deal of respectability back to this beleaguered institution we call the UAAP. heck, i'll even backtrack on my present stance to get DLSU to leave the UAAP.

basta laro lang.

conejo17
08-01-2007, 05:43 PM
If this article is accurate the request of DLSU will be denied!

http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/storypage.aspx?StoryId=86640

The then UAAP board, citing the infraction didn’t affect the outcome of that match played on Sept. 7, 1991 won by La Salle, 79-75, denied the protest, .....

In that game, the Lago brothers played for around 30 seconds but it was Ateneo, which scored two points against La Salle.

Howard the Duck
08-01-2007, 07:35 PM
ang labo ng rule na 'to ???

berdengobserver
08-01-2007, 07:54 PM
Ang mga ganitong insidente ang sumisira sa dangal at integridad ng liga at ng eskwelahan. Pinagmamalaking matatalino at edukado ang mga nagtapos sa la salle pero ang lumalabas sa ganitong protesta, mga bobo at gung gong ang galing sa taft.* Kahit sinong marunong magbasketbol ang tanungin mo kung naglaro ba ng sabay si long at si latterre, isasagot sa iyo hindi!* NAPAKALINAW NON!!!

Ang problema kasi, ang kikitid mag-isip ng iba.* Nakakatawang nakakainis na mismong si coach pumaren ay gumamit ng rason na kung hindi naman nakalalamang at nakakapagbago ng laro ang pagpasok sa loob ng dalawang banyaga, eh di dapat pinalaro niya hanggang 3rd quarter yung 2 banyaga niya.* Coach Pumaren, mag-isip ka naman, naturingan kang konsehal pero mga rason mo, ANG BOBO!!

Kitang kita na lumabas nga si Long sa court para maiwasan na magsabay sila ni zion.* Simpleng simple!

Sa uaap board naman, isipin niyong mabuti kung anong klaseng mga batas ang ginagawa niyo.* Sayang lang ang ginagastos niyo sa meeting kung puro palpak at parang hindi tunay na pinagnilayan ang mga alituntunin at patakarang pinatutupad ninyo.* Gumamit lang kayo ng sentido komon!* Kung hindi, ibigay niyo na lang sa mahihirap yung mga ginagastos niyo sa mga pagpulong niyo.* May tunay na matutulungan pa kayo!


Hey utoy, marunong ka ba magbasketball? Sa post mo, ang lakas mong magsalita ng Bobo pero it seems sa post mo na mas Bobo ka. Ganto kasimple, when Long substituted Jai, he became the official 5th man of Ateneo. Kahit wala syang ginawa sa court, sya ang fifth man. Gets mo Bobo?

nightowl
08-01-2007, 08:00 PM
Even if he just stood there, the fact that he subbed for Jai means he was the official 5th man of Ateneo on the court, and he can only leave the court if he was SUBSTITUTED PROPERLY, VIA THE TABLE OFFICIALS. You cannot just walk off the court and say you were never in, in the first place. Black cannot send in Jai for Long without Jai formally requesting to sub at the officials table.

Coach Norman knows that-nagpapalusot lang.

And if Jai subbed for kirk, then it can only mean that time ran, because you cannot take out someone who just came in during the same dead ball situation.

Howard the Duck
08-01-2007, 08:03 PM
you cannot take out someone who just came in during the same dead ball situation.
are sure about this? sa NBA live kasi pwede 'to ;D

BigBlue
08-01-2007, 08:07 PM
BO and Nightowl, alam mo, if you read through the posts here, no one's disputing those facts naman eh. we all know and accept that. now what? what do those things prove?

an infraction was made, caught a few seconds too late-after the ball was set into play-and Ateneo was T'd up for that.

Howard the Duck
08-01-2007, 08:16 PM
BO and Nightowl, alam mo, if you read through the posts here, no one's disputing those facts naman eh. we all know and accept that. now what? what do those things prove?

an infraction was made, caught a few seconds too late-after the ball was set into play-and Ateneo was T'd up for that.
The T was not for the 2 foreigner rule, it was for jai's entering the court w/out the approval of the table officials.

admu_addict
08-01-2007, 08:27 PM
The T was not for the 2 foreigner rule, it was for jai's entering the court w/out the approval of the table officials.


hence they never played together. the evidence that they were on the court together is inconclusive.

Howard the Duck
08-01-2007, 08:37 PM
The T was not for the 2 foreigner rule, it was for jai's entering the court w/out the approval of the table officials.


hence they never played together. the evidence that they were on the court together is inconclusive.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=LeWq_5CLTks
at the 33-second mark, it was seen that kirk was at the court when coach norman pulled him.

cl.blue.24
08-01-2007, 08:42 PM
Again, if Long and Laterre actually played on the basketball court together, why didn't La Salle, or Coach Franz protest right there and then? All he kept on asking the referee was "May violation ba? Kung may violation, may technical" It appeared to me that Coach Franz didn't even know what was going on. They claim that Long and Laterre played together for 16 (?), 20(?) seconds. Then why didn't they inform the refs immediately? Why did the table officials allow Kirk to enter the court? Why didn't the refs notice?




It's funny how some Lasallites don't agree that Coach Franz filed the protest, while some really want the asterisk win.

Howard the Duck
08-01-2007, 08:43 PM
Again, if Long and Laterre actually played on the basketball court together, why didn't La Salle, or Coach Franz protest right there and then? All he kept on asking the referee was "May violation ba? Kung may violation, may technical" It appeared to me that Coach Franz didn't even know what was going on. They claim that Long and Laterre played together for 16 (?), 20(?) seconds. Then why didn't they inform the refs immediately? Why did the table officials allow Kirk to enter the court? Why didn't the refs notice?




It's funny how some Lasallites don't agree that Coach Franz filed the protest, while some really want the asterisk win.
I dunno, if bigote knew what was happening, would the game be defaulted automatically while the game was ongoing?

BigBlue
08-01-2007, 08:50 PM
that's actually a good question Howard, what exactly are the implementing/operating rules for an actual in-game situation? should the officials be in-charge of allowing a substitution based on citizenship? or does it rely on the coaching staff? and like you mentioned, if it happens, does this result to a default win?

dami palang butas ng rule na to no?

Howard the Duck
08-01-2007, 09:03 PM
that's actually a good question Howard, what exactly are the implementing/operating rules for an actual in-game situation? should the officials be in-charge of allowing a substitution based on citizenship? or does it rely on the coaching staff? and like you mentioned, if it happens, does this result to a default win?

dami palang butas ng rule na to no?
ang alam ko ang table officials sa FIBA/basketball rules lang ang paki nila. kung may questions not about basketball, like this one, technical committee/commish na yan. present ba si commish noong game na iyon? could he default the game on the spot since the two "played together"?

actionscript
08-01-2007, 09:57 PM
I think Franz Pumaren doesn't care if they actually get a favorable outcome from filing the protest. He must have thought that filing the protest could distract the Ateneo team in their next games, and help them lose some of it. He lost that game against Ateneo already, should the Board award DLSU the win, that's just a bonus. But at least he was able to keep the Ateneo team and its coaching staff worrying about the issue.

In short, all he wants is a distraction for the Ateneo and for them to suffer the effects such a distraction could bring.

muddatrucker
08-01-2007, 10:35 PM
Hey utoy, marunong ka ba magbasketball? Sa post mo, ang lakas mong magsalita ng Bobo pero it seems sa post mo na mas Bobo ka. Ganto kasimple, when Long substituted Jai, he became the official 5th man of Ateneo. Kahit wala syang ginawa sa court, sya ang fifth man. Gets mo Bobo?

Once again I would just like to point out na nakakatuwa talaga pag ginagamit niyo yung salitang stupid/tanga/bobo. Especially you.

Ngayon, as mentioned a gazillion times before: HINDI DINIDISPUTE ANG FACT NA PUMASOK SI LONG HABANG NANDUN SI LATERRE. Ang fact na dinidispute ay kung dapat bang iforfeit ng Ateneo ang laban dahil dito kahit wala namang effect sa laro (except for the free throws awarded to La Salle).

Hindi ko alam kung bakit yan ang ginagamit niyong smoking gun ng argument niyo.

Ganito na lang, to make it simpler:
Kung letter of the law ang susundin, dapat nga iaward sa La Salle ang laro.
Kung spirit of the law (your argument when Ateneo protested your win after a similar infraction 16 years ago), Ateneo ang panalo.



If this article is accurate the request of DLSU will be denied!

http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/storypage.aspx?StoryId=86640

The then UAAP board, citing the infraction didn’t affect the outcome of that match played on Sept. 7, 1991 won by La Salle, 79-75, denied the protest, .....

In that game, the Lago brothers played for around 30 seconds but it was Ateneo, which scored two points against La Salle.

If only things were that simple in the UAAP. But we all know the board's track record with precedents.

bit_bang_boom
08-01-2007, 11:12 PM
Ngayon, as mentioned a gazillion times before: HINDI DINIDISPUTE ANG FACT NA PUMASOK SI LONG HABANG NANDUN SI LATERRE. Ang fact na dinidispute ay kung dapat bang iforfeit ng Ateneo ang laban dahil dito kahit wala namang effect sa laro (except for the free throws awarded to La Salle).


Nakuha mo pre. Nakuha mo.

joelex
08-01-2007, 11:34 PM
its good that some ateneans admit to the fact that long and laterre were on the the court together as part of the 5 players. yan ang tunay na atenista, hindi yung pinagpipilitan pa din na hindi magkasama.

no one's denying the validity of the win which is well deserved by the eagles, its just that there are rules to be followed and if violated even by accident as what transpired, there are corresponding sacntions.

admu_addict
08-01-2007, 11:39 PM
and there are precedents to be followed. (helloooow, uaap board, take note please)

nightowl
08-02-2007, 06:38 AM
^^^Then the more recent precedent should be followed, which would be the game that the Lady Eagles voluntarily forfeited because they fielded two foreign players!

Eagle_Eyes
08-02-2007, 09:03 AM
di talaga makatanggap ng pagkatalo

gameface_one
08-02-2007, 09:39 AM
UAAP official submits report

By JOEY VILLAR
The Philippine Star

After a weeklong investigation on La Salle’s protest of its controversial game against Ateneo last week, UAAP commissioner Ed Cordero Wednesday night submitted his recommendation to the league’s technical committee which in turn will make its deliberations on the case.

But Cordero didn’t give details as to what his recommendation was, whether or not the league would uphold the protest, since the technical committee, headed by Kiko Diaz of University of the Philippines, will still have to meet and decide on the issue.

“We apologize for this matter taking quite a long time, because we want to see everything that needs to be seen,” said Cordero in an official statement. “We want to be able to come up with the fairest decision possible, one which both sides will find acceptable.”

As this developed, the UAAP board, chaired by Fr. Ermito de Sagon, OP, of host Santo Tomas, set an emergency meeting at 2 p.m. Thursday at the Ninoy Aquino Stadium, apparently to tackle the issue.

“There’s going to be a meeting by the board at 2 p.m. tomorrow (Thursday),” a source told The STAR.

La Salle lost to Ateneo, 77-80, in overtime last Thursday. But the Archers claimed the Eagles had fielded in two foreign players – American Kirk Long and Australian Zion Laterre – at the same time in one stretch in the second period in a clear violation of the league rule, which prohibits a team to use two foreign players at the same time.

Meanwhile, University of the East tries to extend its amazing run to six as it takes on Far Eastern U at resumption of action in the 70th UAAP men’s basketball tournament at the Ninoy Aquino Stadium.

In the other game, Adamson faces State U in a duel between winless teams.

vickster
08-02-2007, 09:56 AM
its good that some ateneans admit to the fact that long and laterre were on the the court together as part of the 5 players. yan ang tunay na atenista, hindi yung pinagpipilitan pa din na hindi magkasama.

no one's denying the validity of the win which is well deserved by the eagles, its just that there are rules to be followed and if violated even by accident as what transpired, there are corresponding sacntions.


i think the area where most people disagree or are unclear on is the interpretation of "playing". it is not about "pinagpipilitan na di magkasama"

it is a fact that long was announced in, and that he did cross/step on/straddle the sidelines while hesitating. if the rules say that this constitutes playing in the technical sense, then so be it.

it is also a fact that while he was doing all this hesitating, he did not participate in the game, i.e. he did not defend, did not run, pass, etc, in fact, since he was partly out of bounds, no one would dare pass to him ;D so playing in the basketball sense, he definitely was not. im sure even all lasallites with all the video footages and who watched live would agree that there were only 4 ateneans "playing in the basketball sense" at that time.

but the UAAP is obviously not a barangay or sandlot league where rules are vague and anything goes so it will boil down to:

- how they will interpret "playing"
- will they emphasize the spirit of the law - ateneo obviously did not benefit, and it was 100% clear that they saw the mistake and did not want the 2 guys to be playing together after realizing the mistake. how this can be misconstrued as attempting to cheat, i just dont know.
- will they emphasize the letter of the law - again, if the interpretation of "playing" means substitution and one foot on the court, then by all means, forfeit the game.

31gna
08-02-2007, 10:20 AM
UAAP official submits report

By JOEY VILLAR
The Philippine Star

After a weeklong investigation on La Salle’s protest of its controversial game against Ateneo last week, UAAP commissioner Ed Cordero Wednesday night submitted his recommendation to the league’s technical committee which in turn will make its deliberations on the case.

But Cordero didn’t give details as to what his recommendation was, whether or not the league would uphold the protest, since the technical committee, headed by Kiko Diaz of University of the Philippines, will still have to meet and decide on the issue.

“We apologize for this matter taking quite a long time, because we want to see everything that needs to be seen,” said Cordero in an official statement. “We want to be able to come up with the fairest decision possible, one which both sides will find acceptable.”

As this developed, the UAAP board, chaired by Fr. Ermito de Sagon, OP, of host Santo Tomas, set an emergency meeting at 2 p.m. Thursday at the Ninoy Aquino Stadium, apparently to tackle the issue.

“There’s going to be a meeting by the board at 2 p.m. tomorrow (Thursday),” a source told The STAR.

La Salle lost to Ateneo, 77-80, in overtime last Thursday. But the Archers claimed the Eagles had fielded in two foreign players – American Kirk Long and Australian Zion Laterre – at the same time in one stretch in the second period in a clear violation of the league rule, which prohibits a team to use two foreign players at the same time.

Meanwhile, University of the East tries to extend its amazing run to six as it takes on Far Eastern U at resumption of action in the 70th UAAP men’s basketball tournament at the Ninoy Aquino Stadium.

In the other game, Adamson faces State U in a duel between winless teams.


kainis! wala pa ding nangyayari.. ayaw magdesisyon ng sarili nya.. nagsayang lang ng espasyo sa dyaryo

blue_very
08-02-2007, 11:15 AM
because of his indecision, cordero is now suspect in trying to psyche out ateneo players in their battle vs ust this saturday.* he is using his position as comm , under the cover of long delayed decision, to give a psychological advantage to his alma mater.* either wala siyang utak, or wala siyang b***g to decide or sinasadya niya. :'(

shyboy
08-02-2007, 11:38 AM
At least iba na ihip ng hangin ngayon. * A few days ago ang pinagpipilitan ni Black, dapat si Laterre (Zi) ang pinalitan hindi si Reyes (Jai). Ang tanong dito, bakit hindi kinorek ni Black yung substitution kung tingin niya mali in the first place? Bakit niya hinayaan unless yun talaga ang plano niyang substitution at nakalimutan niyang nasa loob si Laterre? First lie.

Pangalawa, ang pinagpipilitan din dati ay dead ball pa nung pumasok si Reyes. *Nung lumabas ang video, it can be seen na live ball na nung lumabas si Long at biglang sumugod si Reyes. Second lie.

Pangatlo, sabi ni Black di niya pinayagan pumasok ng court si Long kasi apat lang daw ang plano niyang palaruin. Sinong gung-gong ang gustong gumawa nito kahit na marami pa siyang pwedeng palaruin? Pwede lang ito kung foul out na karamihan ng players at wala nang pwedeng ipasok. Third lie.

BigBlue
08-02-2007, 11:59 AM
At least iba na ihip ng hangin ngayon. A few days ago ang pinagpipilitan ni Black, dapat si Laterre (Zi) ang pinalitan hindi si Reyes (Jai). Ang tanong dito, bakit hindi kinorek ni Black yung substitution kung tingin niya mali in the first place? Bakit niya hinayaan unless yun talaga ang plano niyang substitution at nakalimutan niyang nasa loob si Laterre? First lie.

Pangalawa, ang pinagpipilitan din dati ay dead ball pa nung pumasok si Reyes. Nung lumabas ang video, it can be seen na live ball na nung lumabas si Long at biglang sumugod si Reyes. Second lie.

Pangatlo, sabi ni Black di niya pinayagan pumasok ng court si Long kasi apat lang daw ang plano niyang palaruin. Sinong gung-gong ang gustong gumawa nito kahit na marami pa siyang pwedeng palaruin? Pwede lang ito kung foul out na karamihan ng players at wala nang pwedeng ipasok. Third lie.



wow you guys are incredible. the way you jump to conclusions? amazing. so,... intelligent! grabe. im so sad my parents didnt send me to your school. sana ganyan na din ako katalino. ang tindi mag-connect the dots no?

actually kahit hindi nya binasa lahat ng mga post dito, hindi nya tinignan lahat ng anggulo, lahat ng detalye, kahit hindi nya kayang basahin ang utak ni norman black, alam na nya agad kung ano ang totoo at ano ang hindi! ang tindi! sana ganun din ako. bow.

bluewing
08-02-2007, 12:04 PM
UAAP official submits report

By JOEY VILLAR
The Philippine Star

“We apologize for this matter taking quite a long time, because we want to see everything that needs to be seen,” said Cordero in an official statement. “We want to be able to come up with the fairest decision possible, one which both sides will find acceptable.”



how could that be?

Howard the Duck
08-02-2007, 12:14 PM
UAAP official submits report

By JOEY VILLAR
The Philippine Star

“We apologize for this matter taking quite a long time, because we want to see everything that needs to be seen,” said Cordero in an official statement. “We want to be able to come up with the fairest decision possible, one which both sides will find acceptable.”



how could that be?
the much hallowed UAAP Board also has ADMU and DLSU members, so they'll work out a compromise ;D

admu_addict
08-02-2007, 12:17 PM
^^ a compromise is actually a lose-lose situation (if strictly defined). i just hope it's not some gray area decision.

Howard the Duck
08-02-2007, 12:29 PM
^^ a compromise is actually a lose-lose situation (if strictly defined). i just hope it's not some gray area decision.
you're correct, a compromise makes the 2 parties unhappy. mas ok naya kung isa ang happy at isa ang unhappy :P

bluewing
08-02-2007, 12:30 PM
UAAP official submits report

By JOEY VILLAR
The Philippine Star

“We apologize for this matter taking quite a long time, because we want to see everything that needs to be seen,” said Cordero in an official statement. “We want to be able to come up with the fairest decision possible, one which both sides will find acceptable.”



how could that be?
the much hallowed UAAP Board also has ADMU and DLSU members, so they'll work out a compromise ;D



obviously.

pero whatever *decision they come up with will naturally tilt in favor of one or the other. at the end of the day, one team will just have to bend over backward like beckham for the sake of "compromise."

muddatrucker
08-02-2007, 12:33 PM
^^^Then the more recent precedent should be followed, which would be the game that the Lady Eagles voluntarily forfeited because they fielded two foreign players!

Anong precedent dun? Voluntarily forfeited nga eh, so walang ruling. Oh and by the way, Cassie Tioseco is not a foreign player.

And if you actually bothered to read my last post you'll know why the situation is different.

berdengobserver
08-02-2007, 12:57 PM
Hey utoy, marunong ka ba magbasketball? Sa post mo, ang lakas mong magsalita ng Bobo pero it seems sa post mo na mas Bobo ka. Ganto kasimple, when Long substituted Jai, he became the official 5th man of Ateneo. Kahit wala syang ginawa sa court, sya ang fifth man. Gets mo Bobo?

Once again I would just like to point out na nakakatuwa talaga pag ginagamit niyo yung salitang stupid/tanga/bobo.* Especially you.

Ngayon, as mentioned a gazillion times before:* HINDI DINIDISPUTE ANG FACT NA PUMASOK SI LONG HABANG NANDUN SI LATERRE.* Ang fact na dinidispute ay kung dapat bang iforfeit ng Ateneo ang laban dahil dito kahit wala namang effect sa laro (except for the free throws awarded to La Salle).



E MAS BOBO ka pala sa nireplyan ko. Mag-quote ka ng sinabi ko not reading kung kanino ako nagreply. Magbasa ka nga BOBO, TANGA, STUPIDO. Natatawa nga ako kapag nag-claim kayo na sobrang talino nyo pero in fact, BOBO ka rin. I replied to the one saying that Long and Laterre did not play together. And that dude was saying na Bobo, so I just said Bobo back because his arguement was flawed. Please read it back. Besides, your dispute is so BOBO ulet. So far, after reading all the arguements here and other forums as well, I never saw the UAAP Rule, 'Two foreign players should not play at the same time, but if it did not affect the outcome of the game, it is ok.'

bluebruiser90
08-02-2007, 01:04 PM
^^^Then the more recent precedent should be followed, which would be the game that the Lady Eagles voluntarily forfeited because they fielded two foreign players!


That cannot be used as a precedent. It is a unilateral act by a school under the particular circumstances. Walang pakialam ang UAAP sa naging desisyon ng Ateneo sa game na iyon ng Lady Eagles. How will the decision come out if it was used as a precedent?

"Whererfore premises and precedent considered, Ateneo is ordered to vouluntarilly forfeit the game against La Salle...."

Parang mali.

muddatrucker
08-02-2007, 01:27 PM
I never saw the UAAP Rule, 'Two foreign players should not play at the same time, but if it did not affect the outcome of the game, it is ok.'

See the board decision on Ateneo vs La Salle, 1991.

I can reply to any post I want. This is, after all, a public forum. If you didn't want someone else to reply then you should've PMed him. And I'm still amused by your usage of that word.

berdengobserver
08-02-2007, 01:59 PM
See the board decision on Ateneo vs La Salle, 1991.

I can reply to any post I want to.* This is, after all, a public forum.* If you didn't want someone else to reply then you should've PMed him.* And I'm still amused by your usage of that word.


The board's decision on La Salle vs. Ateneo, 1991 can be the greatest defense of Ateneo. It is just funny that Black, Palou, Trillo etc. had different defenses like Long was subbing for Zi not Jai, it is ok if there only four players on court, etc.

Anyhow, do you know the story behind the Lago incident? Correct me if I am wrong, but I read what happened was, one of the Lagos was shooting freethrow. Two players were about to have substitution, the other Lago had sub X player, and Y player should have sub the other Lago who's making the freethrow. Unfortunately, when the Lago missed shooting his 2nd freethrow, technically he was not sub because the game continued. If this is correct, it just proved that we did not have control about fielding two foreign players since after the 2nd freethrow, the game resumed. Anyhow, the Lago brothers still played at the same time so this is really the greatest defense of Ateneo.

It is different with Ateneo's case now since Black mistakenly let two foreign players play at the same time even though it did not affect the outgame of the game.

Btw, I am also amused that you are also one of the word that you are amused of.* :D

muddatrucker
08-02-2007, 02:04 PM
Anyhow, do you know the story behind the Lago incident? Correct me if I am wrong, but I read what happened was, one of the Lagos was shooting freethrow. Two players were about to have substitution, the other Lago had sub X player, and Y player should have sub the other Lago who's making the freethrow. Unfortunately, when the Lago missed shooting his 2nd freethrow, technically he was not sub because the game continued. If this is correct, it just proved that we did not have control about fielding two foreign players since after the 2nd freethrow, the game resumed.

It is different with Ateneo's case now since Black mistakenly let two foreign players play at the same time even though it did not affect the outgame of the game.

Then the two Lagos technically played together, even if Lago #1 had made the free throw. La Salle should've waited for the next deadball situation before making the sub.


Btw, I am also amused that you are also one of the word that you are amused of. :D
No, I am not. Sorry, but you are mistaken. :P

berdengobserver
08-02-2007, 02:16 PM
Then the two Lagos technically played together, even if Lago #1 had made the free throw.* La Salle should've waited for the next deadball situation before making the sub.*

Sorry about that, I edited my post. Yep, you are right, technically they played together so again, this is really the greatest defense of Ateneo. Btw, La Salle could have not waited for the next dead ball because again, during the freethrow of the other Lago, the other Lago was already on court. This is ok because the clock is dead (making freethrow). And again, after the Lago made the 2nd freethrow, and hopefully it would make it (it is deadball again), the Y player could replace him, but this did not happen. My point is, the 1991 mistake is different because we don't have control of it. :D

In the case now, actually I still could not believe it, Coach Norman could make the stupid mistake.


No, I am not.* Sorry, but you are mistaken.* :P

Hmm, if you say so. Anyhow, if I were you, stop that kind of remark. My message was not for you anyway. Peace!

I just hope that this would be fixed already so we can all move on.

bluegirl
08-02-2007, 02:34 PM
i don't think you can say that la salle didn't have control over the situation. they should have made sure that the 1st lago was already out of the playing court before they allowed the 2nd lago to enter the court. di siguro nila expect na missed ang 2nd freethrow and hindi deadball situation so hindi pwdeng lumabas ung 1st lago. but again, kung sinigurado muna nila na nakalabas na ung 1st lago, bago pinasok ung pangalawa then wala nang protesta pa. there was a mistake there, period. wala nang excuses.

in our (ateneo) case, there was a mistake. coach norman black already admitted to that mistake. and much like the 1991 case, wala naman naging effect sa outcome ng laro ung nangyari. hindi pa nga sigurado hanggang ngayon kung talagang masasabi ba for sure na Kirk Long and Zion Laterre indeed played together and thus violated the Lago Rule.

eustacia
08-02-2007, 02:39 PM
in our (ateneo) case, there was a mistake. coach norman black already admitted to that mistake. and much like the 1991 case, wala naman naging effect sa outcome ng laro ung nangyari. hindi pa nga sigurado hanggang ngayon kung talagang masasabi ba for sure na Kirk Long and Zion Laterre indeed played together and thus violated the Lago Rule.

A mistake for which there is a corresponding penalty. Norman Black cannot just say “I made a mistake in substituting Long for Reyes, but I tried to rectify it as soon as I discovered it, so I shouldn’t be penalized”. Nobody is saying that Black intentionally wanted to violate the rule, it was really an oversight on their part.

admu_addict
08-02-2007, 02:42 PM
eh mistake din naman yung sa mga lago eh, di ba? they had control as bluegirl said.

bluegirl
08-02-2007, 02:44 PM
A mistake for which there is a corresponding penalty. Norman Black cannot just say “I made a mistake in substituting Long for Reyes, but I tried to rectify it as soon as I discovered it, so I shouldn’t be penalized”. Nobody is saying that Black intentionally wanted to violate the rule, it was really an oversight on their part.


if the penalty to that mistake would be similar to that given to la salle when they made a similar error (lago 1991), then i shouldn't have any problems with that.

berdengobserver
08-02-2007, 02:45 PM
i don't think you can say that la salle didn't have control over the situation. they should have made sure that the 1st lago was already out of the playing court before they allowed the 2nd lago to enter the court. di siguro nila expect na missed ang 2nd freethrow and hindi deadball situation so hindi pwdeng lumabas ung 1st lago. but again, kung sinigurado muna nila na nakalabas na ung 1st lago, bago pinasok ung pangalawa then wala nang protesta pa. there was a mistake there, period. wala nang excuses.

I agree with your post bluegirl. With the 2nd freethrow being missed, La Salle did not have control, but in choosing the players to be sub, we had control. Dapat nagpakasigurado muna La Salle, and expect the worse. Hmmm, this is really the great defense of Ateneo. Anyhow, I just hope that this should be decided once and for all so we can move on. *:'(

eustacia
08-02-2007, 03:45 PM
eh mistake din naman yung sa mga lago eh, di ba? they had control as bluegirl said.


Have we established that the rules then are the same as the rules now? Ang problema kasi taon-taon nagbabago ang rulebook, so we don’t know if forfeiture was also the prescribed penalty then.

gameface_one
08-02-2007, 03:59 PM
Just in: DLSU's protest denied by the commissioner and the technical committee for lack of merit. This however will be elevated to the board due to "differing appreciation" in the merits of the case.

Howard the Duck
08-02-2007, 04:03 PM
^^ and the saga continues ;D

Wang-Bu
08-02-2007, 05:59 PM
Just in: DLSU's protest denied by the commissioner and the technical committee for lack of merit. This however will be elevated to the board due to "differing appreciation" in the merits of the case.


LARO na lang kasi ulit!

Better yet MISS na lang, unang sumablay mula sa freethrow line panalo ang koponan, para hardcore talaga.

Pero ang maglalaban sina Ferdinand at Raba... ;D

flsfnoeraekadad
08-02-2007, 06:07 PM
Selyado na. Guys, focus na lang tayo sa NU. ;D

animoateneo
08-02-2007, 06:32 PM
tama nga si bluegirl. since the precedent is the lago case in 1991, and save for a few circumstances, the two cases involved the violation of the same rule hence should incur the same resolution. so in any case we cannot stop la salle from filing a protest but no matter what happens its up for the board to decide now.

what i cannot stand is the fact that some people from La Salle are claiming that there was malice on our part as if we intentionally subbed Kirk for Jai. What happened was a mental lapse for if we did allow it to happen then we might as well had stopped the game at that point and hand the W to La Salle on a silver platter. What happened was however the mistake was realized and attempts to rectify it were made. Please don't try to drag us down to your level because if indeed Kirk Long played with Zion Laterre in clear violation of the rule, then we would have forfeited the game like what we did with the Lady Eagles' case. But in this case clearly Kirk was not able to play because Norman hauled him back in so...

muddatrucker
08-02-2007, 06:49 PM
In the case now, actually I still could not believe it, Coach Norman could make the stupid mistake.
Me neither. But he's human, like the rest of us.



No, I am not. Sorry, but you are mistaken. :P

Hmm, if you say so. Anyhow, if I were you, stop that kind of remark. My message was not for you anyway. Peace!

I just hope that this would be fixed already so we can all move on.

:)

conejo17
08-02-2007, 07:29 PM
tama nga si bluegirl. since the precedent is the lago case in 1991, and save for a few circumstances, the two cases involved the violation of the same rule hence should incur the same resolution. so in any case we cannot stop la salle from filing a protest but no matter what happens its up for the board to decide now.

what i cannot stand is the fact that some people from La Salle are claiming that there was malice on our part as if we intentionally subbed Kirk for Jai. What happened was a mental lapse for if we did allow it to happen then we might as well had stopped the game at that point and hand the W to La Salle on a silver platter. What happened was however the mistake was realized and attempts to rectify it were made. Please don't try to drag us down to your level because if indeed Kirk Long played with Zion Laterre in clear violation of the rule, then we would have forfeited the game like what we did with the Lady Eagles' case. But in this case clearly Kirk was not able to play because Norman hauled him back in so...


Bullseye!!! Natumbok mo ;)

gameface_one
08-03-2007, 09:07 AM
UAAP cage chief junks La Salle protest vs Ateneo

The basketball commissioner of the University Athletic Association of the Philippines (UAAP) junked the protest action filed by the De La Salle University against the Ateneo de Manila University for allegedly fielding two foreign players at the same time during their match-up last week.

The UAAP’s technical committee headed by Kiko Diaz of the University of the Philippines affirmed the recommendation issued by commissioner Ed Cordero to dismiss La Salle’s complaint due to lack of merit.

Diaz said they will forward the recommendation to the UAAP board which will have the final say on the issue.

The La Salle Green Archers lost to the Ateneo Blue Eagles, 77-80, in overtime play last week.

The Archers, however, said the Eagles had fielded two foreign players -- American Kirk Long and Australian Zion Laterre -- at the same time in one stretch in the second period.

La Salle said this was a clear violation of the league rule which prohibits a team to use two foreign players at the same time.

La Salle presented a 38-second edited video from Studio 23's coverage as evidence to back its claim.

The video showed that the ball was already in play when Ateneo coach Norman Black pulled Long out of the playing court and ordered Jai Reyes back into the game.

Long was fielded in for Reyes as announced by the game barker, unaware that Laterre was already inside for Ateneo.

Ateneo representative Ricky Palou, meanwhile, said the team is neither happy nor threatened by the ruling.

La Salle, on the other hand, declined to comment pending the UAAP board’s decision that is expected to come out on Sunday. With a report from TJ Manotoc, ABS-CBN News

flsfnoeraekadad
08-05-2007, 05:44 PM
The board finally puts the protest into rest by burying it to the ground. No worries, we still keep second place heading into the next round of play.

gameface_one
08-05-2007, 11:55 PM
UAAP junks La Salle protest vs Ateneo

The University Athletics Association of the Philippines (UAAP) has formally dismissed the protest filed by De La Salle University after losing to Ateneo de Manila University in a basketball game on July 26 at the Araneta Coliseum.

In a statement, the UAAP Board of Trustees agreed with the recommendation of UAAP basketball commissioner Ed Cordero denying the protest of La Salle for "lack of merit."

“The UAAP Board of Trustees, at its emergency board meeting held at the press room of the Araneta Coliseum, adapted and affirmed the findings and recommendations of the office of the UAAP Basketball Commissioner, in the person of Mr. Ed Cordero, in connection with the protest that was filed by the De La Salle University against Ateneo de Manila, as such, the protest is denied,” the board said in a statement.

The board, meanwhile, said that in line with the decision, it will implemented new rules with regard to the fielding of foreign players. The rules will be in effect for the remainder of the season.

For the first offense, the head coach of the violating team will be charged with a technical foul and the aggrieved team will be given two free throws plus ball possession.

The board added that the same penalty will be applied if the rule is violated again and the coach will be immediate ejected from the game.

“In the event of a team erroneously playing two foreign athletes at the same time, the official scorers shall immediately notify the referees to administer the prescribed penalty,” it said.

The match was marred with controversy after the Archers complained that the Blue Eagles had American Kirk Long and Australian Zion Laterre on the floor at the same time in the second quarter.

La Salle, which took an 80-77 overtime beating against Ateneo, said the Blue Eagles broke the league’s rule that prohibits more than one foreign-born player from playing on the court at the same time.

La Salle even submitted a video to the UAAP board that showed the ball was indeed in play when two foreign players of Ateneo were seen inside the playing court.

A 38-second edited Studio 23 video released to the media showed that the ball was already in play when Ateneo coach Norman Black pulled Kirk Long, an American, out of the playing court and Jai Reyes was ordered back into the game.

Long was fielded in for Reyes as announced by the game barker, unaware that Laterre, the other foreigner, was already on the court for Ateneo.

Under UAAP rules, no team is allowed to field two foreign players at the same time. With a report from The Philippine Star