This thread is full of win. Props to all of it's contributors.![]()
Splitter didnt fumble the ball.. Adams raised his leg to knee the ball away?
This thread is full of win. Props to all of it's contributors.![]()
Never complain about the FT disparity when your coach runs an intentional fouling scheme.
Yep.
Stern and Silver are soooo "clever."
Man, these refs sure are in the Spur's pockets,
trying to help them make a comeback.
And yes, the casual fan sheep are
THAT brainwashed.
This. Not even pretending to try to win it.
I saw Parker and Ginobili, et. al. head into the paint. They end up bodied and pushed to the floor, out of bounds, into a turnover, etc. On the other end, it is a foul though. It takes a lot of intestinal for ude to keep being aggressive when you are only penalized for it, while the Thunder are rewarded for it. The Spurs didn't have a great game, but more than 50% percent of the reason they didn't have a great game is that they were not allowed to have a great game. They were hanging tough until that record-breaking free -throw quarter by OKC.
Correct.
Yes. If it quacks like a duck it is a ing duck. That third quarter was some crooked . Put us in the bonus early and then every trip down the court is two points from the charity stripe. Reminded me of a pinball machine, or something, construction work driving fines, OKC playing with a bonus quarter - everything times two! You can't win against that no matter how "aggressive" you are. Pop knows this, and the people that don't sit around second guessing him: "Why Pop no try win game? Pop no try hard! Spurs need more aggressive!"
Why bother to hide it when even Spurs fans are conned into believing it didn't happen?
No. You can't just explain it away like that. You can't have teams play by different rules, especially in the second half, and then say the one getting preferential treatment outperformed the other. In science, that conclusion from that experiment would get -canned IMMEDIATELY.
It is being conditioned into not getting clobbered into a turnover and a no call. The wide open three is the only thing the officials have difficulty manipulating. But, we even see them do this...wait to see if it goes in...late whistle...off the ball foul call waive off basket...or what we get with Mills last night...that if Mills would have been a Thunder would have surely been a four-point play.
you stole the words of my mouth......thunderefs to the rescue
just plain and simple guys...OKC are not as good as people think.....OKC need the refs to help them win games
Actually in hindsight you're right, it absolutely does matter, at least for this game. I'm hoping it doesn't matter for the outcome of the series, though. We'll see where this takes us. Maybe a little adversity helps us be even sharper on offense.
It's disgusting how badly the league tries to artificially prop up the Thunder with horrendously lopsided officiating. They did the exact same in 2012 too.
22-0 FTA disparity in a quarter is a in joke. 31-7 for a game is pathetic, but not as pathetic as giving the Spurs 9 useless FTAs in the final minutes to pretend like the Thunder only got twice as many FTAs as the Spurs in the game as opposed to the reality which was 4 1/2 times as many FTAs before the game was clearly over.
Clearly nothing has changed with Stern retiring. Shame on me for thinking this bull wouldn't happen again.
I don't KNOW it, but I strongly suspect it. And, the minute I am convinced, I will just stop watching. At this point, I am just closing out Tim's career and 40 years of habit and tradition. A WWE fan, I am not.
It does. And, even worse, this opinion comes from a seasoned fan. When the NBA can con even a seasoned fan as Nono, they've got a good thing going.
Nono hasn't been conned by anything. He'll fully admit that the reffing is biased in favor of OKC. He just thinks it's useless to complain about it because our complaining won't change the fact that OKC will continue to be propped up by the refs.
Last edited by jARS mEsH sEt; 05-26-2014 at 03:01 PM.
Yes. Someone asked me about the talking heads and I mentioned same...you don't kill the goose that lays the golden eggs...
A team could never play so good that a series of orchestrated "unfortunate" bad or missed calls could not undo their work.
Not just intangible momentum, but when a player is allowed to goal-tend you change your shot, when you know you are going to get fouled with no call, it can change your shot, when you are held on rebounds with no call but are not allowed to hold when rebounding without being called...all of these things can add up to rebounding differentials and lowered shooting percentages...and they are related to officiating...so to say: "If they just shoot better and rebound better the refs won't matter..."
The refs can influence shooting percentages and rebounding just like every other aspect of the game.
This might not be a hollow argument if The Spurs are notorious for being a low-fouling team. This is a known quan y. RW and KD wanting foul calls against us like we are the Washington Generals is a totally different animal.
You might want to mention Perkins is OFTEN in foul trouble and that that small differential in the first half is a drop in the bucket compared to the second.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)