论文部分内容阅读
There’s been a lot of talk during this post-season, about a variety of different fouling issues. It’s a common topic, starting when players are children, and following the game through to the NBA. And why wouldn’t it be? Anyone who tells you that basketball isn’t a contact sport is a liar. Any game that involves ten players in a contained space trying to keep the ball out of each others’ hands is always going to involve a certain amount of physicality. And given that, in contrast to football and hockey, these athletes aren’t wearing any protective gear, the contact needs to be strictly regulated - hence, the foul calls.
本赛季季后赛，一系列不同的犯规问题引发了不小的讨论。这是一个很常见的话题，球员们从孩子时期就开始讨论了，一直会延续到他们进入NBA。为什么不呢？如果有人告诉你，篮球不是一项有身体接触的运动，那他一定是骗子。任何在有限空间里有十个球员在场，同时双方的目标都是尽量组织对方把球投出去，这必定会产生一定数量的身体接触。而且，相比美式橄榄球和冰球，篮球运动员没有装备任何护具，所以身体接触赢定被严格限制——因此有了犯规这一说。
Some people complain that there are too many foul calls, some that there aren’t enough. Partisan spectators gripe about their teams getting called and the officials’justifications. It’s touchy for coaches, who require their players to be aggressive, but need to be concerned for said players’ well-being.
有人抱怨说，比赛里犯规吹得实在太多，也有人说裁判吹的还不够。球队的忠实拥趸总会因为自己喜欢的球队被吹犯规而恼怒，从而对裁判的执法表示不爽。对于教练来说，这是比较敏感的问题。他们需要自己的球员保持侵略性，但又要考虑球员的状态。
Going back to elementary school-age kids who are just learning the sport, trying to explain the difference between a true foul and contact or, further, a good foul and a bad foul, is not a pleasant experience.
回去跟小学阶段正在慢慢学习这项运动的孩子们，解释一个真正的犯规和一次身体接触，或者说，一个好犯规和烂犯规的却别，实在不是什么有意思的工作。
Fouling is a complicated topic, and I don’t want to get into a technical analysis of what a foul is and when one should be called, but rather the effect that fouling has on the game as a whole.
犯规是个很复杂的问题，我也不想陷入纯技术性的讨论，告诉你犯规到底是什么，什么时候该吹犯规。我只想从犯规给比赛带来的影响这个整体来谈一谈。
Most of my friends and family are very committed hockey fans, and when I ask them why they prefer televised hockey to televised basketball, a recurring answer has to do with the perceived violence.
我的大部分朋友和家人都忠实的冰球迷，当我问他们，为什么更喜欢在电视上看冰球而不是篮球时，暴力是反复被提及到的答案。
“In hockey,” they say, “if they hit, it’s okay, and everyone keeps going. In basketball, they make contact, but pretend they didn’t.”
“在冰球中，”他们说，“撞上是没问题的，大家会继续比赛。在篮球中，他们会身体接触，但每个人都装作没有。”
It’s an accountability issue, apparently, and I cannot explain how much I agree with that. How many times have we watched as a player clearly hacks an opponent to bits, and then gripes at the call? How frustrating is that?
显然，这可以说明一些问题，我也没法告诉你我有多同样这种说法。有多少次，我们看着一名球员明明打到了对手，但是却抱怨裁判的吹罚？这种情况到底让人感到多不爽？
On the flip side, during round two, Blake Griffin slammed someone to the ground, stood up, picked the other player up, and apologized for the foul.
相反的，在季后赛第二轮里，布雷克·格里芬把一个球员撞到在地，他站起来，拉起对方，然后为这个犯规向对方道歉。
Now, I’m not a huge Griffin fan, (I may very well be the only person in the world who isn’t) but that was fantastic. That was sportsmanship, and as a coach I believe that’s something to be prized in a player. When players take responsibility for their fouls it makes a good impression on coaches and fans, and makes the game more fun.
我不是格里芬的超级球迷(我有可能是世界上唯一不是他球迷的人)，但这个行为非常棒。这就是职业道德，作为教练，我觉得这是球员值得表扬的行为。当球员对自己的犯规负起责任时，这会给教练和球迷留下很好的印象，会让比赛变得更有趣。
Isn’t it much more impressive to watch a game based on pure basketball and not petty rivalries? Sure, the snarking and sniping is entertaining at times, but a game played on the merits of the sport is always more appreciated. Watch Twitter – when teams play well, with an organized offence and an effective defence, people talk about it. When the Spurs ran roughshod over the Thunder last week, people couldn’t stop thanking them for a good, enjoyable game. When the Clippers got hit with five technical fouls in a game against the Spurs, there wasn’t much commentary.
难道看一场纯粹的篮球比赛不比各种小动作更有意思吗？当然，有时候针锋相对也很有娱乐性，但打出运动本质的比赛还是更受人喜欢的。看看推特就知道，当球队打得好时，当他们打出有组织的进攻和有效的防守，就会引起人们的谈论。当马刺上周暴虐雷霆时，球迷们都在感谢他们送上了一场好看的比赛。当快船在和马刺的一场比赛里吃到五次技术犯规时，可没这么多评论。
Another point that’s often made is the sheer volume of fouls called. As mentioned above, there are safety issues involved, and we rely on officials to keep control of the game– but it gets to a point sometimes that a foul is called on every possession. It interrupts the flow of the game, and almost cheapens the effort of the players, giving them an out.
另一个经常被提到的问题就是吹罚犯规的数量。就像上面提过的，比赛中会涉及到球员人身安全，所以我们依赖裁判去控制比赛。但有时候就会出现每一次进攻都会吹罚犯规的情况。这会打断比赛的流畅，也会让球员的努力变得廉价，给他们提供便利。
To add to this, the athletes in the NBA are meant to be the best of the best. They are marketed as such, are paid to be such, and yet they don’t seem to be able to take a little contact. Most fouls that are called under the basket, while they are technically illegal, really shouldn’t affect anything if these players are as strong and ‘superhuman’ as they are made out to be. There’s a difference between shoving someone to the ground, and brushing a hand against the shooter’s arm.
此外，NBA球员都是极品中的极品。他们就是这样被宣传的，他们赚了那么多钱，但他们看起来却一点身体接触都不能承受。很多篮下犯规，从规则上讲的确是，但假如球员真的像被宣传的那样强壮和“超人类”，那些犯规根本不会造成什么影响。在把一个推倒在地和碰到球员的投篮手之间是有区别的。
Perhaps, instead of the onus being on the officials to penalize the defence, coaches should focus on training their players to play in spite of contact. In a drill that requires parental supervision, I stand under the basket with a foam stick and ‘foul’ my players, and they are frequently able to get the and-one. And these are twelve year olds. Imagine how effective they’ll be when they’re in their twenties.
也许，不该指责裁判的判罚对防守产生不好的影响，教练应该集中精神，训练自己的球员能够在身体接触的情况下继续打球。在一场有家长监督的比赛里，我站在篮下，手拿一个塑料棍子，对我的球员“犯规”，他们总能得到2+1的机会。这还只是12岁的孩子，想象一下，当他们20岁的时候，会变得多有效率。
This trend of the whistle-happy official doesn’t only affect the offence. Defensive players are punished for their efforts, which is extremely unfortunate, as it’s more difficult in general to develop a strong defence without adding the threat of fouling out simply for doing one’s job. Perhaps drawing the foul purposely should be more often answered by issuing an offensive foul, simply for disrespect of the sport.
这种频繁的吹罚影响的不仅是进攻。防守球员会因为他的努力受到惩罚，这是非常不幸的。你很难在还得考虑仅仅因为自己努力就面临着被罚出去风险的同时，还能在总体上提高自己的防守。也许有意思地制造防守犯规更多地被吹罚为进攻犯规(会改善这个情况)，仅仅因为他们不尊重这项运动。
The issues with fouling don’t only come from the players and officials. Coaches are also guilty of taking advantage of the system. There was an article posted to this site recently by Steve Finamore, talking about whether to foul or defend in the last minutes of a close game, which covers the topic quite nicely. What I would like to comment on is the strategy demonstrated in the Western Conference Finals, nicknamed, ②“Hack-A-Splitter”, in which the Spurs player Tiago Splitter is fouled repeatedly. He has a low shooting percentage from the line, and so if the Thunder can rebound from his miss, they regain possession of the ball with little time off the clock and a lower chance of the Spurs scoring.
犯规的问题不仅来自球员和裁判，教练利用规则漏洞也是有错的。这个网站最近由Steve Finamore贴出了一篇文章，文章里讲到了在比赛接近的比赛最后时刻到底该犯规还是防守，这个很好地契合了最近的主题。我想评论的是在西部决赛里出现的一种战术，所谓的“砍斯普利特”战术，马刺的蒂亚戈·斯普利特不停地被犯规。他的罚球命中率很低，所以说，如果雷霆能在他罚丢后抢到篮板，他们就能在比赛时间不多时再得到进攻机会，而马刺的得分机会则不多。
What these types of plays indicate is the weakness of the team’s defence, rather than strategic brilliance. If a coach truly trusted their team, they would allow them to play the game straight, without resorting to dirty tactics. We’re back to the notion of accountability, this time on the part of the coach, and truly, a coach is more respected on the basis of their sportsmanship than the talent of their team. A successful coach will focus on developing their team’s strengths, rather than exploiting their opponents’ weaknesses.
这种战术说明了一支球队防守的弱点，而不是球队有多高明。如果一个教练真心相信他的球队，他们会让球队好好打比赛，而不是用这种肮脏的伎俩。我们又回到了关于责任的问题上。这一次在教练的问题上，说真的，一个教练会因为他的职业道德会不是球队的天赋更受尊重。成功的教练会重点提高自己球队的强项，而不是发掘对方的弱点。
This is all pretty well reserved to ‘regular’fouls, but there has certainly been some discussion of flagrant fouls and technical fouls. In the post-season it’s to be expected that everyone’s intensity would run a fair bit higher, and tempers would flare, which explains the upswing at this time of year in ‘extreme fouling’. The issue, again, is how this affects the game.
这说的都是普通犯规，当然还有恶意犯规和技术犯规的讨论。季后赛，可以想象每个人的精神都会更紧张，球场气氛更热烈，所以每年这个时候都会出现一些“特别犯规”。问题还在于，这样犯规会怎样影响比赛。
Technical fouls, for the most part, are justified, and are an excellent tool for the officials to keep control of the game. In quite a few circumstances, a point needs to be made, and many coaches and players will happily take their technical for speaking out about some perceived injustice. The only major issue with the technical is the double-technical, which arises when two players get tangled. If there’s a situation when both players are at fault, then shouldn’t something more effective be done to avoid the situation happening again? Officials should give a free throw to each team, at least, rather than resetting the whole play, or choose not to make the call and let everyone play on.
技术犯规，绝大多数都是合理的，这也是裁判控制比赛的非常好的工具。在一些场合中，有时候必须发出自己的看法，很多教练和球员很乐意利用技术犯规的机会，表达自己对判罚不公的不满。技术犯规唯一一个大问题，就是双重技术犯规，这会出现在两名球员纠缠在一起时。如果两名球员都有错，难道不应该有一些更有效的方法阻止类似情况再次出现吗？至少裁判应该给每支球队一次罚球机会，而不是重新开始一次进攻，也不是选择不去吹罚，让所有人继续比赛。
The flagrant fouls are a much more contentious issue, and here, I don’t want to attack whether or not they should be called, but rather, what should happen when one is called. Players like Metta World Peace, who foul severely and frequently, are a danger to other participants in the game. As the consequences of sports injuries are becoming better known, is it really justifiable to continue to allow serious fouling without an equally serious punishment?
恶意犯规是更有争议的话题，在这里，我不想争论这种犯规是否应该被吹罚，我更想说的是，当一名球员被吹罚恶意犯规时该出现什么情况。像慈世平这样经常犯规，并且犯规凶狠的球员，他对其他参与比赛的球员是种威胁。在运动受伤的后果越来越被大众了解时，这种严重的犯规却没有相应严重处罚的情况真的是合理的吗？
True, World Peace was suspended for seven games following his flagrant foul on James Harden, but in the case of Udonis Haslem and Ronny Turiaf during the Heat/ Pacers series, neither were ejected from the game. They were both allowed to finish a progressively more physical game, at the increasing risk of other players, until the NBA reviewed the calls and suspended them.
没错，慈世平在他那次对哈登的犯规后被禁赛了七场，但是在热火和步行者的系列赛里，哈斯勒姆和图里亚夫都被没有被驱逐出场。他们都被允许在一场对抗过度、对其他球员危险性增高的比赛里继续打下去，直到联盟重新审查了吹罚，并且对他们实施了禁赛。
The spirit of the foul call is to protect players and keep the game fair; how is this accomplishing either goal? Instead, is ejecting players like DeMar DeRozan (of the Toronto Raptors) for throwing the basketball in frustration meant to keep control of the game?
吹罚犯规的意义在于保护球员，让比赛公平。这种情况怎么会满足这两个目标？相反的，驱逐像德马尔·德罗赞(来自猛龙)这种仅仅因为沮丧而扔球的球员能控制住比赛吗？
So, what is the final decision? Are there too many foul calls, or too few? The solution is evidently as complex as the problem, but maybe it stems from the philosophy of the foul call, and not the application. If officials have as their priority the safety of the players and the control of the game, and if they follow the spirit of the foul call rather than the letter, it would most likely make the sport more exciting and impressive.
所以说，最后的意见是什么？到底犯规吹得太多还是太少？解决的方法和问题本身一样既明确又复杂，也许这源于犯规吹罚哲学，而不是其适用。如果裁判把保护球员和控制比赛放在首位，如果他们遵循犯规吹罚的本质而不是条文，这就很可能让比赛变得更刺激，更令人记忆深刻。
And isn’t that excitement why we’re watching anyway?
这不正是我们看比赛的原因吗？f