I'm pretty sure that's how most here use the phrase as well - it's pretty clear as day when you see it. No need to get on a high horse about it
Though you don’t hear it as much any more, “over the back”.
No, that’s wasn’t “over the back”. Your player is vertically challenged, standing there like a statue, while my player is actually making an effort to grab the rebound.
Beat me to it...Raw
I mean, he's not wrong. Pretty consistently there are posters bemoaning the "high hedge" where the high hedge is not happening, and where it becomes clear that the phrase is being used to describe any situation in which the big challenges the ballhandler when coming over a screen.I'm pretty sure that's how most here use the phrase as well - it's pretty clear as day when you see it. No need to get on a high horse about it
Don't get me started... You should never watch Walt Frazier broadcasting a Knicks game!ESPN is currently infatuated with "hoop and the harm" when everyone knows it's an "And-1"...just awful...unless alliteration is your thing
Fair enough - am not in the game chats, but could see it happening there - different animalThere is a substantial group of folks on this board who have absolutely no idea what a high hedge is. When looking at the game chats, it seems like it must be well over half. Because of that, communicating about the merits of it on this board go to hell and a handbasket quickly.
I find that half the arguments on here are because people don't have the same definition of a concept, phrase or word.There is a substantial group of folks on this board who have absolutely no idea what a high hedge is. When looking at the game chats, it seems like it must be well over half. Because of that, communicating about the merits of it on this board go to hell and a handbasket quickly.
Hey Adrien! Did you see this story? Heard about it on the radio. The kid goes to a magnet school, made the public school basketball team, and the principaland and superintendent then denied the kid.'An offensive set' sounds like a lot of standing around.
I think we all know what this means. They call it a push now, but calling it a push is fairly new. If you clobber somebody's back, head and shoulders from behind to get that rebound, it's a foul, one we used to call "over the back". I think it's fine as a more detailed description of the foul. Obviously Donovan can just reach over someone like me without fouling. Maybe they should call it "through the back", you can't go through the player to get the ball.Over the back isn't a foul anyways. If Donovan reaches over some 6'2 guard to grab a rebound, it isn't a foul. If he elbows the crap out of his head... that's a foul.
Good description on "high hedge" or in the case of Carlton when he ran it "somehow got lost two exits away" hedge. Dan has done a great job of using Sanogo on high hedges much more judiciously, and having Donovan in drop, even if fairly tight drop coverage at times.
He loves ball
Yes!!!The use of the word “coach” to describe a commentator. If it’s a retired, successful coach ala Calhoun or Bobby Knight, that’s 100% fine. But quit calling Steve Lappas “coach”.