Reply With Quote
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...
If it happened in the playoffs, I was too busy complaining about smallball.
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...
Time to spare, you say . . . I would like to see that and I honestly will not believe it until I do.
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...?
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 that you can do that in less than one half a sec.
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.
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 ING YEARS AGO! Jeeeeeesus! We sound like pissy Kings fans...and SA actually has 4 ing O'Briens! For 'S sake...
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...
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.
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 ty clock operator after the play.
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.
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.
That was a regular season game IIRC.
I'm locking this thread. Thank you for your compliance.
How the 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.
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.
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.
your point?
That's why nobody gives a , Opie.
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.
But it happened, which makes spurfan crying about clock malfunctions funny, fatboy.
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.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
