Rome: Bron was fouled in act of shooting, but Cavs blew chances

Of course, if LeBron's shot HAD fallen and tied the game, and the refs decided to blow a late whistle to give him the "and 1" and he made the FT, we'd be bitching about it, too...but them's the breaks...you put it behind you and move on...

foul but no continuaiton.

Then I guess I am one of those wearing "homer glasses" because I thought he was fouled before he went into his shooting motion.

It really doesn't matter because if a foul was called, shooting or not, it is still no guarantee of a Cavs win.

If LeBron and Gibson make 1 of the wide open 3's they missed...that play would never have happened or mattered.

I know Cav's fan pain. TD got fouled before OT in Game 7 last year, and it wasn't called. Thats much worse than this no call.

so lets ask Lebron out now 1:54pm and shoot 3 fts =)

no ref was going to give lebron the continuation on that play. he only took the shot because of the foul. he said it himself that he was going to shoot if he gets fouled. he should of had 2 free throws not 3. and the only reason for 2 freethrows is because i believe the spurs were over the limit. he was too far from the 3 point line with too much time on the clock. he could have drove to the 3 point line and took the shot but he was tring to get the ref to bail him out instead of winning it on his own. if the ref where to count that as 3 free throws then everytime a player is intentional fouled at half court or anywhere else and jack up a shot then they should get 3 free throws? the refs are a little smarter then that

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlatMan

Why would any Spurs fan say it was in the act?

Lebron caught the ball, turned towards the hoop and was in motion. Classic case of continuation which is called all the time.

---

Parker had one of these I believe in the third quarter where he was actually fouled going in for a layup (I believe in the 3rd quarter) and not catching a ball hit while he was dribbling away from the basket (a la LeBron) and TP didn't get FTs

Speaking of 3 point fouls, if you review Bruce's last 3 pointer LeBron clearly hit him on the WRIST/HANDS right as he released the ball from his fingertips...but the shot went in and it was a good no call.

He wasn't in the act, Bruce fouled him on his off arm before that hand even touched the ball.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlatMan

Why would any Spurs fan say it was in the act?

Lebron caught the ball, turned towards the hoop and was in motion. Classic case of continuation which is called all the time.

---

lebron said that if he felt contact, then he was going to shoot. the contact occurred before he decided to shoot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlatMan

Are you blind? Where did I say the Cavs lost because of that shot? The Cavs lost because of their inability to hit open shots coupled with extremely good 3pt shooting from the Spurs.

Literally everyone in the media says he was fouled, and 85% of them say he should have been at the line shooting three.

Take off your homer glasses for a change.

---

What? So you think that the media will just state the obvious and move on without trying to create a story line for you whining crybabies to tune into.

If you put any cred into what those idiots are saying then your more of a loser than the Cavs are.

Just suck it up and GOODNITE NOW!

If Cleveland fans are pinning their hopes on a judgment call on an iffy shooting foul (iffy that it was a shooting foul; clearly, there was a foul) that was committed on a falling, fadeaway 28-footer in the last few seconds, then they clearly lost the game well before that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlatMan

Are you blind? Where did I say the Cavs lost because of that shot? The Cavs lost because of their inability to hit open shots coupled with extremely good 3pt shooting from the Spurs.

Literally everyone in the media says he was fouled, and 85% of them say he should have been at the line shooting three.

Take off your homer glasses for a change.

---

So I suppose you have a link and explanation to the statistical analysis of 85% that you so knowingly quote. :donkey Wait a minute.......... Are you just spouting your opinion again? :lol

We really had a foul to give?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlatMan

Are you blind? Where did I say the Cavs lost because of that shot? The Cavs lost because of their inability to hit open shots coupled with extremely good 3pt shooting from the Spurs.

Literally everyone in the media says he was fouled, and 85% of them say he should have been at the line shooting three.

Take off your homer glasses for a change.

---

If you look at the play again, when Bowen had his hands on James "trying" to foul him James had his shoulders perpendicular to the basket, and the ball was still being dribbled, he didn't even have the ball in both hands yet.

You MIGHT get a continuation call if you are lucky if one of those two are happening, but you will NEVER get a continuation call when your shoulders are perpendicular to the basket and the ball is not even secured in both hands at the time of contact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlatMan

Are you blind? Where did I say the Cavs lost because of that shot? The Cavs lost because of their inability to hit open shots coupled with extremely good 3pt shooting from the Spurs.

Literally everyone in the media says he was fouled, and 85% of them say he should have been at the line shooting three.

Take off your homer glasses for a change.

---

the unfortunate situation is like you said they lost the game prior to that desperation shot and it sucks that it had to come down to that one play to hopefully tie it. Funny 85% of the media says it was a foul but Lebron James says it was not, it was incidental contact.

It happened to the Spurs last year against dallas, it came down to one possession but worse, last game of the series and Manu did not convert. But the loss cannot be blamed on that ONE play. Spurs missed some critical free throws down the stretch.

The play with Varajao was pathetic decision making and I think that was more critical + not getting the time out that Mike Brown said he was trying to take.