Reply With Quote
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/15...o-spurs-game-2
Former NBA ref Steve Javie's Interpretations...
Because of Last Night's events, it has been discussed that such a report does exist...
Here it is... Been listening to reacts from all the talking heads on TV and radio and none of them got it right... Still, as was pointed out to me by someone whose opinion I respect, the NBA has covered their a$$e$ on this one...
On to okc where the Spurs are looking for PAYBACK!
http://official.nba.com/wp-content/u...SAS-5-2-16.pdf
You can read the interpretations and even though it won't change a thing, you can add here where you disagree or agree.
http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/id/15...o-spurs-game-2
Former NBA ref Steve Javie's Interpretations...
Article says "After the ball was tossed in by Ginobili, foul calls were missed on the Spurs' Patty Mills and Kawhi Leonard."
a. Is this a typo? Ball "tossed in by Ginobili."
b. fouls made by Patty and Kwa or fouls by Thunder against Patty and Kwa?
This stuff means absolutely nothing. It's game 3. No one that matters really cares.
So all calls/non calls labeled incorrect are against Spurs, except the Waiters offensive foul and the Ibaka/LMa jersey grab..
Also, #800 .
Build a bridge, get over it.
Who cares. We should have never been in that position at home. Some guys played like dogs out there. Need to bring it in meth city
Yep, being unable to hit ing layups and getting down double digits at home early is a killer.
I guess this isn't an obvious foul:
The report said it was an "incorrect non-call".I guess this isn't an obvious foul:
Scola. I can't believe we ing lost Scola.
That last sequence by the officials was bad all the way around. They swallowed their whistles on every infraction on both sides of the ball. Quite frankly, I don't understand the purpose of the two minute report other than to piss off fan bases.
Sports is reflective of life. The more rules there are the higher the probability that those enforcing the rules will get them wrong in the most critical moments. The one great failure in sports as in life is that we continue to place layer after layer of rules as if they will somehow magically solve a problem when in reality it only makes matters worse.
Now that it is Wednesday, the original reason I posted was to read the NBA version, have people react to their statement and just vent. I agree that it didn't change the outcome of the game, but it did change (maybe) how games will be more accountable by refs, if only to say I'm sorry, NBA fans we screwed up for the umpteenth time. Still, The Spurs did play lousy and by all rights had no business with a chance to win that game. They do have to play better so that the whistles or no whistles have no affect on its outcome. On to game three where I hope the Spurs go back to pick and rolls involving not just Tony and LA, but I would like to see a 3-4 pick set with LA and Kawhi... The ISO with LA, while netting points, is leaving the rest of the team ball watching and not cutting. See the tape between game one and game two and just see how LA's points are different. Game one, teammates were involved. Game two, not so much... The assists numbers will tell you that as well.
The transparency of the league with such reviews provides reference context to 1) uphold the integrity of the game, 2) improve on the call making going forward. It's on this later point where statistically the data from all such reviews (since these 4Q official reviews were conducted and published by the league), should be (IMO) used to weed out bad officials (high frequency repeat offenders).
It is my understanding that the privilege to officiate Playoff games comes as a reward to the better officials/crews during the regular season. I believe that the overall data from these reports should have a bearing/impact on that selection process (if it doesn't already). I don't necessarily know where Marc Davis' official track record places him on such a list, but I've heard many voice their opinion that he's one of the more error-prone officials in the league. Maybe someone like FWD can verify/validate.
Honestly as a Spurs fan you cant complain about the way the game ended imo
The refs clocked out early but this affected both teams so its not like we got robbed
I woulda preferred a better shot like a Ginobili floater or a normal patty shot instead of rushed n trying to fall hoping for a foul
But that aint got to do with a ref
Thanks for the explanation. It's just seems like more and more officials are swallowing their whistles at the end of games, even on obvious calls. It used to be on small or questionable contact, but pulled jerseys, player take-downs, and now a push from out of bounds while the official is standing right there supposedly focused on the player inbounding the ball and the defender??? That's crazy.
A foul is a foul, whether it happens in the first minute or the last minute of a game. I know, and everyone knows, it's not called that way. I'm not sure where you draw the line, but the unspoken edict of "let the players decide the game" is getting out of hand.
Should have been a call on Ginobili. Honestly we should be thankful if anything. We commited the violation first, and we commited more fouls.
The whole sequence should never have happened to begin with. The very first no call on the list was a "clean screen by S Adams". WOW both feet moving and using leg to impede KL. A call there would have change the entire game. Spurs ball on the side and maybe we score the two points needed to win.
As for the list, they sure know how to cover their ass when it comes to stretching the rules.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
