OJ Mayo shot: "Officials should be held accountable for horrible call"

[iminol]

Who responds for turning on/off the game clock? 1 person, 3 person, guy from the league?

http://www.clipsyndicate.com/video/playlist/20522/2388519?title=sports via WOAI

It's just a question.

[Jimcs50]

Who responds for turning on/off the game clock? 1 person, 3 person, guy from the league?

http://www.clipsyndicate.com/video/playlist/20522/2388519?title=sports via WOAI

It's just a question.



The same motherfucker that let Fisher's shot get off with .4 secs.

[duncan228]

Pop, for anyone that can't watch the video.


..."You can’t do that in 2.1 seconds,” Popovich said of a play that involved an in-bounds pass from the baseline under the Spurs’ basket, two dribbles, one pass and a shot. “The clock didn’t start until after one dribble and back in his hand, and then the clock started. There was no way that it was good. But that’s the breaks of the game, and it’s what happened. It’s not a referee’s call. The clock started slow.”

Popovich: Clock error allowed Mayo 3-pointer (http://blog.mysanantonio.com/spursnation/2011/04/18/popovich-clock-error-allowed-mayo-3-pointer/)
Mike Monroe

http://blog.mysanantonio.com/spursnation/2011/04/18/popovich-clock-error-allowed-mayo-3-pointer/

[z0sa]

They couldn't even get the clock started at the start of the effin game. Get your shit together already.

[iminol]

The NBA uses game-clock operators from other teams for playoff games, rather than the local official timekeepers who work each team’s games in the regular season. The referees also can start the clock, using devices on their belts.

Got it, but still don't know which "other teams for playoff game operator" run this game.

[MannyIsGod]

Laker Mavs obviously.

[Fpoonsie]

Meh. It was a shot at halftime, for which they had a whole 'nother half of basketball to make up for. They didn't. There's the game.

Bringing it up after the fact seems kinda pathetic.

[FromWayDowntown]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/21530-nba-playoffs-where-referee-incompetence-happens

The same thing happened a few years ago in a playoff game in Detroit. It's frustrating that the league hasn't developed a solution to this problem where one is clearly available.

It didn't cost the Spurs the game -- they did plenty of things to cost themselves the game -- but it would be worthwhile (I think) for the league to solve these kinds of problems before they actually do cost someone a game.

[Obstructed_View]

Meh. It was a shot at halftime, for which they had a whole 'nother half of basketball to make up for. They didn't. There's the game.

Bringing it up after the fact seems kinda pathetic.

Is it okay since I mentioned it at the time it happened? I posted up about it on Sunday.

By the way, .4 was legit. Mayo's shot wasn't even close. They got an extra second before the clock started.

[Obstructed_View]

Meh. It was a shot at halftime, for which they had a whole 'nother half of basketball to make up for. They didn't. There's the game.

Bringing it up after the fact seems kinda pathetic.

Is it okay since I mentioned it at the time it happened? I posted up about it on Sunday.

By the way, .4 was legit. Mayo's shot wasn't even close. They got an extra second before the clock started.

And it was the difference in the game. The first two points doesn't contribute any less to your final score than the last two points.

[z0sa]

We lost by 3 and that Mayo 3 should not have counted. One could argue that it was, indeed, the difference in the game.

[cantthinkofanything]

We lost by 3 and that Mayo 3 should not have counted. One could argue that it was, indeed, the difference in the game.

Not many would argue that. You could say the same thing about a dozen questionable calls or missed calls either way.

[Fpoonsie]

Is it okay since I mentioned it at the time it happened? I posted up about it on Sunday.

By the way, .4 was legit. Mayo's shot wasn't even close. They got an extra second before the clock started.

And it was the difference in the game. The first two points doesn't contribute any less to your final score than the last two points.

It was the difference in the game going into halftime. If you can't make up 3 points on a bad call by the end of the game against a 7 seed in YOUR bldg, you don't deserve to win in the first place.

[elbamba]

I was pissed about it at the time but the Spurs overcame that in the 3rd to go up by ten points. That shot didn't matter and they played well enough to win.

What killed the Spurs was poor execution in the last 1:10 of the game. Boy does that seem familiar given the last 2-3 weeks.

[ohmwrecker]

By the way, .4 was legit.

No way.

[z0sa]

.4 was legit in terms of the shotclock. In terms of actually catching and shooting, No Way is the absolutely correct answer.

[elbamba]

yes way. the rules state that it takes .4 sec to catch and shoot. fisher flung it up there as soon as it touched his hand, there's no way to shoot it any faster than that. it was legit

Not that it matters but you are right, there is no way he could have shot it faster. He caught the ball and hit a turnaround jumper. No way indeed. But Spurs sucked it up in game six so who cares.

[Pauleta14]

Meh. It was a shot at halftime, for which they had a whole 'nother half of basketball to make up for. They didn't. There's the game.

Bringing it up after the fact seems kinda pathetic.

this.

[ohmwrecker]

yes way. the rules state that it takes .4 sec to catch and shoot. fisher flung it up there as soon as it touched his hand, there's no way to shoot it any faster than that. it was legit


.4 was legit in terms of the shotclock. In terms of actually catching and shooting, No Way is the absolutely correct answer.

I'm not saying it's not what the rule book states, or that it wasn't an amazing shot. I just don't think Fisher caught the ball, turned around and shot the ball in .4 seconds.

Like elbamba (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=6942) else said, it doesn't matter because the Spurs still fucked the series away . . . it's more the physical possibility of the particular shot in the time allotted that I have difficulty with.

Butthurt withstanding.

[hater]

damn, I thought OJ Mayo had got shot and was gonna miss game 2

[Greg Oden]

Were spurfan crying when a clock penalty wasn't forced on the Spurs allowing Findog to hit a timely 3 against the Kings a few years ago?

[dbreiden83080]

IF the refs had their heads outta their asses Fisher's .4 never counts..

[dbreiden83080]

yes way. the rules state that it takes .4 sec to catch and shoot. fisher flung it up there as soon as it touched his hand, there's no way to shoot it any faster than that. it was legit

It took him longer than .4 to get the shot off. The gap between when the clock started by actually pressing the button took over 1 second to complete..

It was bullshit..

[DesignatedT]

yes way. the rules state that it takes .4 sec to catch and shoot. fisher flung it up there as soon as it touched his hand, there's no way to shoot it any faster than that. it was legit

:lmao

[Obstructed_View]

No way.

I broke it down the night it happened. I had a DVR that did tenths of a second in 10 frame segments. Fisher easily got the ball off with time to spare, even if you don't count that the Lakers deserved .8 because that's when Duncan's jumper over Shaq went through the hoop.

[Obstructed_View]

Were spurfan crying when a clock penalty wasn't forced on the Spurs allowing Findog to hit a timely 3 against the Kings a few years ago?

If it happened in the playoffs, I was too busy complaining about smallball.

[crc21209]

That shot pretty much decided the game. I know the Spurs had their chances all game blah blah blah, but in the end, every single point matters, and those 3 points shouldnt have ever been allowed...

[ohmwrecker]

I broke it down the night it happened. I had a DVR that did tenths of a second in 10 frame segments. Fisher easily got the ball off with time to spare, even if you don't count that the Lakers deserved .8 because that's when Duncan's jumper over Shaq went through the hoop.

Time to spare, you say . . . I would like to see that and I honestly will not believe it until I do.

[Fpoonsie]

That shot pretty much decided the game.

No, it didn't.

Let's say you disallow it, the game is still tied. SA still has to play 5 more mins in the OT, and who's to say whether or not the Spurs could pull another little something outta their ass a la Matty's b2b 3s...?

[Jimcs50]

I broke it down the night it happened. I had a DVR that did tenths of a second in 10 frame segments. Fisher easily got the ball off with time to spare, even if you don't count that the Lakers deserved .8 because that's when Duncan's jumper over Shaq went through the hoop.


This has already been proven that he did not get ball off on time if clock started on time. He was runing to ball, caught it, jumped up and turned to shoot, there is no way in hell that you can do that in less than one half a sec.

[Obstructed_View]

Time to spare, you say . . . I would like to see that and I honestly will not believe it until I do.

Damn, could you be more lazy? I did all that work to come to my conclusion and you just sit back on your ass and ask for proof? You know the date of the game. Go find my post if it's so important to you. I already know the truth. I wanted more than anything to be able to say it wasn't a legit shot and that the Spurs got screwed. It was and they didn't.

[Fpoonsie]

This has already been proven that he did not get ball off on time if clock started on time. He was runing to ball, caught it, jumped up and turned to shoot, there is no way in hell that you can do that in less than one half a sec.

I don't know about what he could/couldn't do in .4 secs, but O_V IS correct in saying that Fish should've had more time to get it away in the first place. The clock stopped late after Timmy's shot.

That, and it was 7 FUCKING YEARS AGO! Jeeeeeesus! We sound like pissy Kings fans...and SA actually has 4 fucking O'Briens! For FUCK'S sake...

[TDMVPDPOY]

excuses excuses

seriously with or without that made shot, we had the momentum and blow our load in the heat of the night when pop played bonner too many minutes when the lead was declining...

[Obstructed_View]

This has already been proven that he did not get ball off on time if clock started on time. He was runing to ball, caught it, jumped up and turned to shoot, there is no way in hell that you can do that in less than one half a sec.

No it hasn't. The NBA rules state that a player can catch and shoot the ball in 3/10 of a second. Fisher was much quicker than that.

[Obstructed_View]

No, it didn't.

Let's say you disallow it, the game is still tied. SA still has to play 5 more mins in the OT, and who's to say whether or not the Spurs could pull another little something outta their ass a la Matty's b2b 3s...?

I agree that it didn't decide the game, and I agree that the Spurs had their fate in their hands and knew the situation. The fact remains that it was the difference in the game, for what little that's worth. I don't actually think it mattered that much other than I was annoyed at the shitty clock operator after the play.

[Greg Oden]

For any 3 OJ hit that should or should not have counted, there's 2 Bonner 3s that shouldn't have counted considering he hit them with the game on the line.

[ohmwrecker]

Damn, could you be more lazy? I did all that work to come to my conclusion and you just sit back on your ass and ask for proof? You know the date of the game. Go find my post if it's so important to you. I already know the truth. I wanted more than anything to be able to say it wasn't a legit shot and that the Spurs got screwed. It was and they didn't.

You don't think I haven't looked? I have yet to see a frame by frame breakdown that conclusively proves that:

a) the shot clock was started when the ball hits Fishers hands

or

b) that he physically caught the ball, took a step, turned and released the ball in .4 seconds

I appreciate that you feel like you are convinced, but Jesus H . . . why are you so defensive about it?


This is not really the thread for this discussion tbh.

[weebo]

Were spurfan crying when a clock penalty wasn't forced on the Spurs allowing Findog to hit a timely 3 against the Kings a few years ago?

That was a regular season game IIRC.

[cantthinkofanything]

I'm locking this thread. Thank you for your compliance.

[Budkin]

How the hell could you eliminate that issue? It's got to be very difficult to get that right every time. There needs to be a replay challenge for that kind of thing.

[cantthinkofanything]

How the hell could you eliminate that issue? It's got to be very difficult to get that right every time. There needs to be a replay challenge for that kind of thing.

This thread is locked but to answer your question:

All they have to do is integrate a sensor in the ball and on everyone's hands. They turn on the sensors when the ref hands the ball to the guy throwing it in. So you have one clock measuring the time to throw the ball in. When the ball is thrown in and it hits the hands of a player, then the shot clock and game clock start. The hand in the sensor also goes off when the ball is released so you can tell when he gets the shot off.
However, you need someone in charge of the sensors to shut off the shooting sensor if it's a loose ball just bouncing off everyone elses hands' (and sensors).
It probably needs some work but I just thought of it in case any of you know how to maybe get this set up for the game tomorrow.

[FkLA]

Whats done is done, but 0.4 wasnt legit tbh...Fish's shots wasnt a simple quick catch and shoot. He caught it in the air, at his hip, with his back turned to the basket. In 0.4 he lands, brings the ball up to his head, turns, and even adds a slight fade in there? I doubt it.

Anyways that Mayo shot is no excuse. Spurs choked the game away, first by giving up the double digit lead and then by wasting Ginger's clutchness. Spurs in 5 though.

[cantthinkofanything]

This thread is locked but to answer your question:

All they have to do is integrate a sensor in the ball and on everyone's hands. They turn on the sensors when the ref hands the ball to the guy throwing it in. So you have one clock measuring the time to throw the ball in. When the ball is thrown in and it hits the hands of a player, then the shot clock and game clock start. The hand in the sensor also goes off when the ball is released so you can tell when he gets the shot off.
However, you need someone in charge of the sensors to shut off the shooting sensor if it's a loose ball just bouncing off everyone elses hands' (and sensors).
It probably needs some work but I just thought of it in case any of you know how to maybe get this set up for the game tomorrow.

Also, there is a metal piece in the ball and a magnet on the hand sensor. So if the shot clock expires, the ball stays in the shooter's hand.

[Greg Oden]

That was a regular season game IIRC.

your point?

[ohmwrecker]

your point?

That's why nobody gives a shit, Opie.

[DeadlyDynasty]

I broke it down the night it happened. I had a DVR that did tenths of a second in 10 frame segments. Fisher easily got the ball off with time to spare, even if you don't count that the Lakers deserved .8 because that's when Duncan's jumper over Shaq went through the hoop.

This...should've been .7 or .8 on the clock after TD's shot. It's a moot point though, the shot was good anyways. Mayo's wasn't, but life goes on...

[FkLA]

This...should've been .7 or .8 on the clock after TD's shot. It's a moot point though, the shot was good anyways. Mayo's wasn't, but life goes on...

The 0.8 argument is pretty weak imo, I mean sure there was 0.8 left when Timmy's shot went in. But if you go back and add that for that shot dont you have to go back and add up all the tenths of seconds that were lost on every made shot?? Fisher's shot wasnt a simple catch and shoot either, there were other motions involved...Spurs-bias aside I honestly dont think it was legit.

[resistanze]

For any 3 OJ hit that should or should not have counted, there's 2 Bonner 3s that shouldn't have counted considering he hit them with the game on the line.

:lol

[Greg Oden]

That's why nobody gives a shit, Opie.

But it happened, which makes spurfan crying about clock malfunctions funny, fatboy.

[Obstructed_View]

The 0.8 argument is pretty weak imo, I mean sure there was 0.8 left when Timmy's shot went in. But if you go back and add that for that shot dont you have to go back and add up all the tenths of seconds that were lost on every made shot?? Fisher's shot wasnt a simple catch and shoot either, there were other motions involved...Spurs-bias aside I honestly dont think it was legit.

No, you don't. They only use tenths of a second in the last minute of the game. Duncan's shot went through the hoop with .8. It's really not that hard to figure out.

And Fisher's shot was quicker than a catch and shoot, which has been proven over and over to take .3. He was basically in the shooting motion when he caught it.

[ohmwrecker]

But it happened, which makes spurfan crying about clock malfunctions funny, fatboy.

It's probably happened to every team, genius. Try to stay focused.

btw, contrary to Mavfan stereotype . . . I don't live in SA, I'm not fat nor a Mexican.

I do know that you, however, look like a Matt Bonner/Justin Bieber test tube baby.

[DPG21920]

But it happened, which makes spurfan crying about clock malfunctions funny, fatboy.

http://spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=177443

:lol :cry

[FkLA]

No, you don't. They only use tenths of a second in the last minute of the game. Duncan's shot went through the hoop with .8. It's really not that hard to figure out.

And Fisher's shot was quicker than a catch and shoot, which has been proven over and over to take .3. He was basically in the shooting motion when he caught it.

Pretty sure its the last minute of every quarter, no? But regardless do you go back and add all up all the tenths lost during every made shot during that final minute??

And Fisher was not in a shooting motion when he caught it. He caught it in the air, at his hip, and had to land. With his back to the basket. Then he had to go back up, bring the ball up to the top of his head, and release. While having to turn around and even faded some to avoid Manu. There were too many motions involved for it to be your typical catch and shoot, much less for it to be faster.

[Obstructed_View]

Pretty sure its the last minute of every quarter, no? But regardless do you go back and add all up all the tenths lost during every made shot during that final minute??
Yes, it's every quarter and overtimes. And no you don't add up tenths. The ruling by the refs on Duncan's shot was wrong, should have been fixed, and today would definitely have been, so whining about Fisher's shot is moot.

[8FOR!3]

Anybody who thinks 0.4 was legit needs to never talk to me again please, I deal with enough dumb asses on a daily basis.

[FkLA]

Yes, it's every quarter and overtimes. And no you don't add up tenths. The ruling by the refs on Duncan's shot was wrong, should have been fixed, and today would definitely have been, so whining about Fisher's shot is moot.

Why add up those tenths on that particular shot, but not others lost in the last minute of that 4th quarter or the previous 3 quarters? How does that make any kind of sense?? Something like that is rarely reviewed btw, I dont recall seeing a ref check the clock after a made basket. Seems unlikely to me that that would happen today, especially when it wasnt blatantly obvious that the clock ran too long after Timmy's basket...a 0.4 (time that was lost) reaction by the clock guy after the the ball goes in isnt something that will usually warrant a review imho.

And Im not whining, whats done is done. Im just saying its pretty ridiculous to say Fish's shot was good or that it was faster than a typical catch and shoot.

[DMC]

Had the Grizz won by 4, no one would care. Had the Spurs won, no one would care.

Let it go.

[Obstructed_View]

Oh my God! Someone shot OJ Mayo??

[cantthinkofanything]

Oh my God! Someone shot OJ Mayo??

Yeah. He just couldn't cut the mustard.

[Splits]

At least someone called it at the time: (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5142764&postcount=432)


Who the fuck is the Spurs clock keeper? That fucking thing didn't start for a full second after the inbounds

[KaiRMD1]

The mayo shot doesn't bother me fro that video, the other stuff does. I thought the reffing would be picked up this season after last the two years' debacle but I guess that was wishful thinking.

[Jimcs50]

Where do you get off saying TD's shot was at .8??? It was .4, the refs reveiwed the play and set clock at the correct time which was .4. You jusy make shit up to suit yourself.

Fish did not catch and shoot as already noted. The Spurs won that game, I have no doubt in my mind.

[Obstructed_View]

Where do you get off saying TD's shot was at .8??? It was .4, the refs reveiwed the play and set clock at the correct time which was .4. You jusy make shit up to suit yourself.

Fish did not catch and shoot as already noted. The Spurs won that game, I have no doubt in my mind.

Whatever delusion makes you happy. There's not any part of your post that's remotely correct.

[FkLA]

Where do you get off saying TD's shot was at .8??? It was .4, the refs reveiwed the play and set clock at the correct time which was .4. You jusy make shit up to suit yourself.

Fish did not catch and shoot as already noted. The Spurs won that game, I have no doubt in my mind.

Nahh, there was no ref reviews back then. And there was 0.8 left right when Timmy's shot went through.

Fish's shot wasnt good though :tu


Whatever delusion makes you happy. There's not any part of your post that's remotely correct.

Two simple questions:

1.Has there ever been a ref review after a made basket, especially one after which minimal time was lost because of simple human reaction ?

2.How can you possibly say Fisher's release was equal much less faster, considering he had his back to the basket and all the motions he had to do to get that shot off ?

[Obstructed_View]

Two simple questions:

1.Has there ever been a ref review after a made basket, especially one after which minimal time was lost because of simple human reaction ?

2.How can you possibly say Fisher's release was equal much less faster, considering he had his back to the basket and all the motions he had to do to get that shot off ?

1.At the time of that shot, all the refs reviewed was if the ball left Fisher's hand before the clock expired. It did, and the shot was good.

2.Go back and watch. It was basically one motion. The NBA rulebook states that if there's .3 left on the clock then you have time to catch and shoot. That's 3/4 of the time that Fisher had. I'm not sure where you think his back was to the basket.

If you're going to make an argument that his shot took longer than a typical jumper, then you should probably point out the extra time the ball was in his hands due to the nature of his shot.

[Jimcs50]

1.At the time of that shot, all the refs reviewed was if the ball left Fisher's hand before the clock expired. It did, and the shot was good.

2.Go back and watch. It was basically one motion. The NBA rulebook states that if there's .3 left on the clock then you have time to catch and shoot. That's 3/4 of the time that Fisher had. I'm not sure where you think his back was to the basket.

If you're going to make an argument that his shot took longer than a typical jumper, then you should probably point out the extra time the ball was in his hands due to the nature of his shot.



The clock started after he caught ball and landed on his two feet. It started a half second too late, thatr is my point.

Timvp did a review of the play afterwards that proved that the clock started too late, that was only way that Fisher could possibly get ball off within .4 secs. It was not catch and shoot, numbnuts.

[Jimcs50]

Here is Youtube of last few seconds.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mav2iBA1cwo

You can see TD's shot was through the net at .4 secs, not .8 secs. I suppose you will argue that video evidence is incorrect.

:rolleyes

[John Basedow]

It's funny to see the affect Fisher's shot still has on some people after 7 years :lol

[Fpoonsie]

It's funny to see the affect Fisher's shot still has on some people after 7 years :lol

It's embarrassing.

[Jimcs50]

It's funny to see the affect Fisher's shot still has on some people after 7 years :lol


This is because, the Spurs always had one glaring event that could have cost them a repeat.

In 2000, it was the meniscus tear, another time it wasDA's shoulder separation after the cheap shot flagrant foul by Mavs, Another time, it was the horrible foul by Manu on Dirk that gave them the 3 point play to tie game, a game that they won in OT. Worst of all was the shot by Fisher, after TD made what we thought was the game winning and probably series winning shot(Spurs would have been up 3-1)

All these bad luck, heart wrenching events are burned into we true Spurs fan's very souls.

Take away 3 of these horrible events, and the Spurs could easily be trying for their 8th ring in 12 years.

:depressed

[Jimcs50]

It's embarrassing.


No, you are embarrassing, because you are an idiot.

[z0sa]

It's embarrassing.

:rolleyes

[John Basedow]

lol thinking Derek Anderson would've saved you in 2001. In 2000 if Duncan doesn't get injured towards the end of the season the best San Antonio would've finished is 3rd, having to go through Portland and then LA. Forget about 2000 and 2001...Outside of Games 5 and 6 of the 2000 WCF, Lakers were untouchable those years. Especially 2001--Not even God would've saved you in that series :lol

[John Basedow]

:rolleyes

7 years, and the call was right. It's time to move on.

[z0sa]

Which call was right?

[John Basedow]

Which call was right?

Call, shot, whatever. The officials ruled it was good, and they were right.

[Fpoonsie]

All these bad luck, heart wrenching events are burned into we true Spurs fan's very souls.

:lmao

[Obstructed_View]

It's funny to see the affect Fisher's shot still has on some people after 7 years :lol

The level of denial it still inspires is amazing. Seriously, if a single good shot is going to derail a team in the conference semifinals to the point that they shit away a 2-0 lead in the series to lose four in a row, who in their right mind thinks they're a title contender? I don't think anyone was beating the Pistons that year. They were dangerous before they knew how good they were and got lazy.

[Muser]

It's funny to see the affect Fisher's shot still has on some people after 7 years :lol

It's quite sad, Fishers shot was a miracle shot but so was Duncans just seconds before.

[Fpoonsie]

It's quite sad, Fishers shot was a miracle shot but so was Duncans just seconds before.


The only thing that kills me is when they're compiling a list a Timmy's greatest playoff moments, that shot's typically number 1. :lol...

...:depressed

[z0sa]

Call, shot, whatever. The officials ruled it was good, and they were right.

Technically, yes.

Actually catching half way turned to the basket, turning, jumping and shooting in 0.4 is impossible, period. I blame the circumstances, not the officials.

No one's arguing the Spurs deserved to win that series or something, brah. 7 years or 77 years won't change the bitter taste a game winning playoff shot leaves in a dedicated fan's mouth... ahem.

[Fpoonsie]

a dedicated fan's mouth...

:lmao

[z0sa]

:lmao

:lol Yeah, only after posting did I realize.

[Fpoonsie]

:lol Yeah, only after posting did I realize.

:lol

[Jimcs50]

:lol



:wow

[FkLA]

1.At the time of that shot, all the refs reviewed was if the ball left Fisher's hand before the clock expired. It did, and the shot was good.

2.Go back and watch. It was basically one motion. The NBA rulebook states that if there's .3 left on the clock then you have time to catch and shoot. That's 3/4 of the time that Fisher had. I'm not sure where you think his back was to the basket.

If you're going to make an argument that his shot took longer than a typical jumper, then you should probably point out the extra time the ball was in his hands due to the nature of his shot.

1.No shit. Noone's arguing that the ball didnt leave his hands before the red light came on, simply that there was a delay in the clock starting which contributed to him getting it off in time. I was asking if there has ever been a review to put 0.4 seconds back on the clock after a made basket, since you said the refs wouldve certainly put the clock back at 0.8 after Timmy's basket in today's NBA.

2.No it was not all one motion.

ucEOOVW8PNE

Look at the vid yourself, broken down. It takes about 3 seconds real time for the game clock to go from 0.4 to 0.3...yet it only takes about 5 seconds real time for it to go from 0.3 to 0.0 which clearly proves that there was a delay at the beginning which enabled Fish to get off his shot. Theres no butthurt or anything of the sort on my part, whats done is done. Im simply refuting some statements made by you and others, that imho are clearly false.

[DMC]

Look at every inbounds play throughout that entire game to see if there was another instance of the clock not starting in time. One is just as relevant as the other. People want to focus on that one shot, but how about the other shots and other inbounds plays?

[FkLA]

True. Unfortunately the NBA rule book says you can really only review shots at the end of quarters. Which is probably a good thing cause games would take too long tbh.

[GSH]

Horse shit. Three points in the first half count just as much as three points in the second half. Those points were handed to Memphis, and they proved to be the deciding margin in the game. But even that doesn't tell the whole story, because without those points, the Spurs wouldn't have been forced to go for 3-pointers at the end.

A missed foul call is one thing. But a call that just puts un-earned points on the board is another. (Like the bizarre refusal to call basket interference against the Griz tonight. That was two free points.) The refs aren't bound by the scoreboard clock. And they have the authority in instant replay to determine that the clock was not started on time. If you're going to use the replay, use it.

[GSH]

Actually catching half way turned to the basket (he was facing more than 90 degrees away from it when he caught the ball), turning, jumping and shooting in 0.4 is impossible, period. I blame the circumstances, not the officials.



For those who are interested in the whole story about the .4 shot:


That season, the NBA rules explicitly stated that the minimum amount of time required to make a shot (other than a tip-in) was .4 seconds. I saw several games get called over that season, when a ball was in-bounded with .3 or fewer seconds and the player receiving the ball let it touch both of his hands. The refs would instantly blow their whistles and wave off anything that happened after that. You may disagree about the amount of time needed to catch and shoot, but that was the rule in the NBA at that time.

They also had a section in the rules that stated that the light behind the backboard was not the final word on when time was up. It went on to say that, in the event of a clock error, the referees have the authority to determine if the light went on too early or too late, and to make the call accordingly.

After Duncan made his shot, the refs went to the instant replay to determine if any time should have been put back on the clock. After the review, they determined that the clock should be re-set to .3 seconds. Then they gathered and discussed it, and decided on .4 seconds instead. To this day, I am convinced that they realized that with .3 seconds, the game was virtually over, and they didn't want to end the game over a .1 second discrepancy. That was probably a worse call than allowing Fisher's shot at the end.

Yes, it's possible to catch and shoot in .4 seconds - but that's not what Fisher did. The play got reviewed by the league office. And I can tell you with 100% certainty that everyone there, including David Stern, recognized that the play itself took more than .4 seconds. They discussed it, and decided that politically they could not take away a playoff game that was already in the books, no matter what the circumstances.

The league never discussed how long the play took, or when the clock started. They announced that the shot left Fisher's hand before the light on the back of the backboard went off, and let it go at that. Even though their own rules explicitly stated that the light was not the final authority. They just couldn't deal with the shitstorm that would have come if they had disallowed that shot and given the game to the Spurs.

Some of you may try and convince yourself that the shot only took .4 seconds. But even the NBA officials don't believe that. And, yes, I knew someone who was employed by the league at the time. (Which is why I learned to despise Stu Jackson so much.) To his credit, Stern actually considered "doing the right thing" and disallowing the shot. But in the end, he decided that it was best for the league not to set the precedent. And as much as I hate to admit it, he was probably right.

Fisher made a great shot, and it counted. The Spurs lost, and that's all that matters. But don't kid yourself that the play took less than .4 seconds. It's not that hard to look at the video to see that isn't true.