PDA

View Full Version : .3 sec shot


SpursRulez4eVeR
11-10-2009, 10:30 PM
brad miller made it :hat at the buzzer
UPDATE: shot waived off
redzero
11-10-2009, 10:31 PM
Oh my God!
dallaskd
11-10-2009, 10:32 PM
fucking shit..
NuGGeTs-FaN
11-10-2009, 10:32 PM
not enough time but they will get it coz its homecourt

NOONE can get a shot off with .3. His fingers are on the ball
NuGGeTs-FaN
11-10-2009, 10:32 PM
nuggs deserve to lose anyway. Played horribly
sribb43
11-10-2009, 10:32 PM
Count it bitches
SpursRulez4eVeR
11-10-2009, 10:33 PM
not enough time but they will get it coz its homecourt

NOONE can get a shot off with .3. His fingers are on the ball

i agree his finger tips still on ball
sribb43
11-10-2009, 10:34 PM
That overhead angle showed it was still on his fingertips
MaNuMaNiAc
11-10-2009, 10:34 PM
its imposible to make a shot in that amount of time
NuGGeTs-FaN
11-10-2009, 10:34 PM
waved off

nuggs win
sribb43
11-10-2009, 10:34 PM
Fuckin technology robbed the bulls
sribb43
11-10-2009, 10:35 PM
Wow
Chieflion
11-10-2009, 10:36 PM
What the fuck? Noah had 21 rebounds. Damn.
Culburn369
11-10-2009, 10:36 PM
the 2 woulda won it, sribb. Good call though. It was late.
sribb43
11-10-2009, 10:57 PM
the 2 woulda won it, sribb. Good call though. It was late.

Ya I noticed he score so I edited my post, I thought I edited it in plenty of time, guess not :lol
JustBlaze
11-10-2009, 11:13 PM
Even though the ball was clearly on Miller's finger & refs made the correct call, Nuggets deserved to lose this game. How bad has Melo's D been the past couple games? good lord with the amount of open space he leaves for shooters, any scrub could go off from the perimeter and have themselves a night. Just beyond horrible D from him the last couple of games. Nene as always, too f*cking passive. Only 7 shot attempts in 40 minutes isn't going to get it done. This team is a mess right now, shit I wouldn't be surprised if Nugs lose to the Bucks tomorrow wit the way they've been playing lately.:lol
sribb43
11-10-2009, 11:18 PM
Any team with Earl Smith III on it's roster deserves to lose
JustBlaze
11-10-2009, 11:21 PM
Any team with Earl Smith III on it's roster deserves to lose
You best get his name right byyatch!
Morg1411
11-10-2009, 11:24 PM
You best get his name right byyatch!

:lol
JamStone
11-10-2009, 11:40 PM
its imposible to make a shot in that amount of time

What if he had .4 seconds?

(sorry, couldn't resist)
BlackBellamy
11-10-2009, 11:46 PM
What if he had .4 seconds?

(sorry, couldn't resist)

No, in that amount of time you can catch and shoot. Believe me. :lol Fucker.
Morg1411
11-10-2009, 11:47 PM
What if he had .4 seconds?

(sorry, couldn't resist)

Ha ha ha ha










(Boo.)
AussieFanKurt
11-10-2009, 11:55 PM
it was a good attempt but bad luck
JamStone
11-11-2009, 12:16 AM
I will murder you in your sleep.

Send Robert Horry with a big shotgun, and have Rasheed guarding the door...
TDMVPDPOY
11-11-2009, 12:26 AM
LOL miller shouldve ran out of the building after hitting that shot, thats what fox did 0.4 biatch
Chillen
11-11-2009, 01:00 AM
What a crazy of a finish this game had, wow. As much as I wanted the Bulls to win with Millers shot it was clearly still on the tip of his fingers at the buzzer. The refs got the call right as much as it sucks to admit it, it was a great shot though it didn't count.
mavs>spurs2
11-11-2009, 01:01 AM
Doesn't matter if it was on his fingertips or not as long as the rulebook states it requires .3 for a catch and shoot.
Darthkiller
11-11-2009, 01:24 AM
Doesn't matter if it was on his fingertips or not as long as the rulebook states it requires .3 for a catch and shoot.

right, then a player can just take his time to aim because the rule says he can get a shot off :bang
Sense
11-11-2009, 01:26 AM
Send Robert Horry with a big shotgun, and have Rasheed guarding the door...

touché
mavs>spurs2
11-11-2009, 01:30 AM
right, then a player can just take his time to aim because the rule says he can get a shot off :bang

no, you're misinterpreting what im saying. i'm saying that he should be allowed to catch and shoot, assuming hte player immediately puts the ball up upon catching it, as long as the rules state that it requires .3 seconds to do so. if this simply isn't possible, which it isn't, then they should revise the rule. but as long as it says .3 to catch and shoot, its fair game
boston.balla
11-11-2009, 08:52 AM
What if he had .4 seconds?

(sorry, couldn't resist)

that's mean :lmao
pauls931
11-11-2009, 08:56 AM
Doesn't matter if it was on his fingertips or not as long as the rulebook states it requires .3 for a catch and shoot.

With logic like that, no wonder you guys are pissed about the 2006 finals.
kobyz
11-11-2009, 09:48 AM
no, you're misinterpreting what im saying. i'm saying that he should be allowed to catch and shoot, assuming hte player immediately puts the ball up upon catching it, as long as the rules state that it requires .3 seconds to do so. if this simply isn't possible, which it isn't, then they should revise the rule. but as long as it says .3 to catch and shoot, its fair game

the rule says that with less than 0.3 you can't catch and shoot no metter what, with 0.3 and more the refs have consideration.
TJastal
11-11-2009, 12:25 PM
the rule says that with less than 0.3 you can't catch and shoot no metter what, with 0.3 and more the refs have consideration.

What if a player doesn't catch and instead hits "volleys" the ball into the basket?

Does it count then?

How about an out of bounds alley oop dunk with .3? Would it count if the ball is still in the player's hands but being dunked at the same time?

"Catch and shoot" is an obtuse term
redzero
11-11-2009, 12:43 PM
Technically, a player can get a shot off in .22 seconds. I saw Jason Kapono do it on a YouTube video. He caught and shot the ball in fewer than .3 seconds.
Xylus
11-11-2009, 12:49 PM
The shot looked legit to me. The tips of his fingers might have been on the ball as the buzzer sounded, but they also might not have; it was really difficult to tell from the replays I saw. In this case, I think you give the shooter the benefit of the doubt.
duncan228
11-11-2009, 04:17 PM
NBA: After review, refs made right call in Nuggets-Bulls (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/basketball/nba/11/11/nuggets.bulls.refs.ap/index.html)

The NBA says the review that overturned a winning shot by Chicago's Brad Miller was correct and handled appropriately.

Referees looked at video replay for about three minutes before determining that Miller's shot came after the final buzzer, giving Denver a 90-89 victory Tuesday. Though a review is supposed to be completed in a two-minute period, crew chief Mark Wunderlich then asked the truck if there were any additional angles.

He was provided with the overhead view that showed the ball was still on Miller's fingertips at the buzzer.

NBA spokesman Tim Frank says "the replay was handled by the book and the referee made the right decision," adding there was no issue with the officials taking extra time.
greyforest
11-11-2009, 05:14 PM
its imposible to make a shot in that amount of time

its possible to slap the ball or alley-oop it, but not catch it and shoot it
Hemotivo
11-11-2009, 11:14 PM
Send Robert Horry with a big shotgun, and have Rasheed guarding the door...

genius