They can review out of bound situations, can they?

[Captivus]

Refs could have easily reviewed that play, regardless of the rules. As long as they get it right, no one will argue.
They didnt do it, because they know the Spurs wont do anything, just like when they rested their starters...blahblahblah...nothing.
The Spurs are treated like idiots...at some point you became one.

[Bill_Brasky]

It feels like they review every single call these days if there's even a smidgen of doubt.

That call was incredibly close to say the least, and the Spurs probably shoulda gotten the ball. And of course its the one time they dont review it.

Still not why they lost though.

[Horse]

Pop asked for a review that should be enough to get one. Replay is there to get right, if it's not why the even have it.

[Dunc n Dave]

Refs could have easily reviewed that play, regardless of the rules. As long as they get it right, no one will argue.
They didnt do it, because they know the Spurs wont do anything, just like when they rested their starters...blahblahblah...nothing.
The Spurs are treated like idiots...at some point you became one.

Sure, they could have reviewed it... if they wanted to be fined or FIRED.

They are NOT ALLOWED to change a TIMEOUT play to an OUT OF BOUNDS play. Just like they can't change an out of bounds call to a foul even if the video (hypothetically speaking) shows the ball went out on Duncan because he was fouled on the arm. The TYPE of call made cannot change no matter what video evidence shows that happened BEFORE the call.

Yes, the refs missed the call (Bogut out of bounds) and missed the foul (Bogut pulling Green off of Jack to keep him from tying Jarrett Jack up), but once the ref signaled TIME OUT, they lost the ability to use replay to look at what happened BEFORE they called time out. A CALLED timeout cannot be changed to an out of bounds.

[mudyez]

Thanks everyone...because of the sucking german commentator (and gamesound at a minimum), I thought they called it out of bounds and after that GS took the timeout. If they never saw it, so be it. It sucks but I agree that they have to be careful with the replays and need to stick to these rules. Imagine if GS wouldn't have taken the timeout! SA can't take one at this point. After GS misses it (or makes it) they review it and replay the last 16 seconds?

Overall the system is far from perfect. Situations like that show you either shouln'd have replays at all (right now we have replays but refs make mistakes anyway) or there needs to me a better system using them (not sure how, but a football like challenge system for out of bounds and goaltending situation could be a foundation even though I don't know how to avoid situations like the one just discribed).

[TampaDude]

Meh...we probably would've missed the last shot in regulation anyway.

[elbamba]

That's the thing, at the time, there wasn't a call that Bogut was out of bounds, Warriors ball. If that were the case, the play would have been reviewed. Jack got the ball and called a timeout.

Think of it this way. If Tim was held in the last two minutes and no one saw it and no call was made on the play, can he go back to the officials and say "he held me, look at the replay"? If this were the case, everyone would be asking for reviews.

If it were in any way part of the rules to review holds, then I would at least think it could be a valid argument. That is my point. I understand why they did not review it, however, at the end of the game, if the issue is raised, whether it was or not I do not know, it should have been reviewed. If the Spurs point it out, review it and then make a decision and give GS their time out back. That would not slow down the game. Right now, review is only allowed for a hand full of calls. There is no reason not to review the play, especially if the Spurs called attention to it. If they did not, then I don't care. I am not saying the Spurs would have won the game. Chances are they would have taken a bad shot like an unnecessary Manu three or a Tim Duncan fade away jumper from 18 feet out.