2016 NBA Playoffs Thread [ARCHIVED] Basketball • Page 82

Yeah, disregarding the foot on the line thing, Manu clearly had his arms extended beyond the line as well. A rarely called thing, but still a violation nonetheless.

 

But in a game you see weird violations like that overlooked all the time, not saying it's right, but it at least happens ... an offensive player reaching across to shove the defender I've never seen. Most of the time you see the ref tell the defender to step back if he's getting to close, and continue. I get the no call on something you see a thousand times during the season, but the no call on the thing you never see ... that's ... you have to call it.

 

Except one causes the other, either way the refs fucked up though.

 

I've seen one happen a thousand times ... I've seen this happen once:



Tons of fouls on that last play. Many unseen and hidden and shirts grabbed. That happened in front of the ref. Like he's looking right at him. The rest is hand wavy fine whatever ... but I mean, you gotta call that.

 

Replay really is comical. I get both sides of the argument, really. Obviously that should've been called, but I can somewhat understand why it wouldn't have been. "we didnt see it" is a horrible explanation though.

 

There's also a difference between something only seen clearly on replay (also something out of the ref's center of focus) and reaching out over the baseline and giving someone a forearm to the chest.

 

You know what they say about the end of the game right..?

The best part was the refs putting on their jackets and leaving right in pops face... Sums it up.

 

I mean it clearly was a foul and should have been called, just that if we are going to breakdown the play it should be looked at from all angles.

Really egregious that they somehow missed the contact live.

 

I thought we were talking about what was a reasonable expectation for what's to be called live in the heat of the moment.

I thought it was obvious why one is different from the other.

Like Jason, I can understand them missing the first one (also because it benefits my team lol). But the second one was just pathetic.

 

Man, that last sequence was almost unprecedented in craziness. The Waiters foul should've been called because of how weird and obvious it was, but you could've called a tech on Manu for his foot on the line since it was the last two minutes (he also made contact with Waiters' arm, it looked like), could've called Kawhi holding Westbrook, you could've called Danny Green for fouling Durant on the steal, Ibaka holding on the rebound. Just nuts.

All that said, Adams played some insane defense in those last few seconds. Then a fan held onto him during play! Unreal stuff.

 

I don't think it'll matter, Spurs will take care of business in OKC.

 

but can we acknowledge how fast the refs grabbed the jackets and hurried off the court with pop tailing them? lol

 

Already did

 

Here's the relevant rule for anyone interested:

Until the passed ball has crossed the plane of the boundary, no player shall have any part of his person over the boundary line
and teammates shall not occupy
positions parallel or adjacent to the
baseline if an opponent desires one of
those positions.

...

A throw-in which touches the floor, or
any object on or outside the boundary
line, or touches anything above the
playing surface is a violation.The ball
must be thrown directly inbounds.

Sorry if the formatting is a little screwy, I'm copying this from the rule book on mobile.

 

Spurs ended up with the ball, a TO in pocket, and a 3 on 1 break. Somehow that resulted in a Mills airball. Pretty bad execution.

I can see both sides of the no-call though. To me, I think it'd be unfair to call the foul on Waiters because his action was a direct result of Manu's violation. How do you call one but not the other? Both guys were in the wrong. I get that one is more blatant but that doesn't change the fact that it was done due to another violation. If Manu doesn't get that close, you don't have the forearm to the chest.

 

This is yet another post about JJ Redick's podcast. The episode with Jamal Crawford is amazing. Listening to the honest human perspective of players fresh off getting eliminated from the playoffs is amazing.

 

I can't think of any basketball scenario where that's how it plays out if someone gets forearmed in the chest. Being close to someone and elbowing them in the chest seem like vastly different things to me. If you're crowding someone in a trap and the offensive player does that ... it's an offensive foul. I can see a case being made for the ref telling Manu to step back, totally get that, but he didn't ... and then he got elbow shoved. What happened after I think is kinda irrelevant, because I've never seen a player flat out shove another player from out of bounds, in front of a ref, and then nothing happen.

 

NBA admits 5 incorrect calls in OKC-Spurs finish

Spurs guard Manu Ginobili should have been whistled for delay of game for stepping on the sideline during the game's final inbounds play, and Thunder guard Dion Waiters should have been called for an offensive foul for crossing the out-of-bounds plane and hitting Ginobili with his elbow, the league said Tuesday in its Last Two Minute Report.

After the ball was tossed in, foul calls were missed on the Spurs' Patty Mills and Kawhi Leonard.

Finally, after the Spurs stole the inbound pass and made a final effort to hit a game-winning shot, a shooting foul should have been called on Thunder forward Serge Ibaka for grabbing and holding the jersey of LaMarcus Aldridge with 2.6 seconds left.

 

There is a difference between overcrowding someone during a trap and violating your boundaries on an inbound pass. Manu was too close to Waiters. Ref should've blown the whistle and stopped the play. He didn't. As a result Waiters created space on his own. Both were in the wrong. The ref let both calls go. My point is, if Manu stood back like he was supposed to, there's likely no elbow. If the ref blows the whistle and calls out Manu, there's no elbow. One missed call led to another. It's not fair to say the second missed call is outrageous when the foul doesn't happen without the initial violation.

 

Was there ever an explanation for Korver shooting those FTs last night?

 

I tried to find information, the only thing I found that could maybe explain it was that this is what it was considered: Defensive Foul, defender pushes opponent into shooter | NBA Video Rulebook

 

Right, but that's the issue. He created space on his own. That's a foul. The existence of other issues on one play doesn't change that - and I would argue that one was definitely more egregious. I see one happen all the time, I've never seen the other. The result, Waiters creating space on his own, is a foul - the reasoning behind why he did it is irrelevant to that fact.

And my point is that a ref missing one call doesn't give a pass to another just because they decided not to make the first call. If you go up for a layup and get fouled hard with no call, and then push the player, you don't get a pass because the first non-call led to the second. The second action is still judged and calls are made. A player gets fouled on one end with a steal, but it goes uncalled, then he drives to the basket — you can't just blatantly throw him to the ground now and think "well, if the first didn't happen, this wouldn't happen" and get away with it. They become independent events and the severity of the infraction also has to be taken into account. Crowding an inbounder and the inbounder shoving the defender away - I think warrants a difference in severity look.

 

Your examples are obviously not wrong but I think the uniqueness of last night's situation makes it hard to compare in my opinion. I guess where we disagree is that I don't think the severity of the foul in this situation should come into play. Despite the severity in the violations both ended with the same result, one player gaining an advantage. No matter how common one is over the other, it's not fair to let one slide and then call the other immediately after.

 

Yeah, I think a big part of my issue is that so much now feels like a constantly changing subjective call of make up call after make up call after what gets seen kind of thing these days. I get that it's hard and it's fast, but you'll see weird offensive fouls called in the first quarter, then never again, and then a random clear foul goes missed later in the game, and more than anything I am annoyed at how crazy inconsistent it's been. Perimeter hand checking fouls called when people are getting smacked in the face under the basket and nothing, except sometimes. San Antonio's Green makes a pretty basic pass, they win that game, but, still, I watch that replay and can't believe Dion got away with that play. I can't believe Donovon had him inbounding the ball either, and if that's what you have going on in your most important possession of the game, that can't be great for OKC. But as a fan and watching inadvertent elbows lead to flagrant 1s in one game, probably justifiable I guess, but then intentional elbows in the very next game lead to nothing — it's like what is going on here? O well, end result: Spurs won 67 games this year and no longer have home court. That's really gotta piss them off.

Now to get ready to watch the Blazers lose by at least 40.