Reply With Quote
Yes, and Rip had a thigh bruise. It is just how the cookie crumbles.
I understood the first time...
The Laker Fan comment was mostly in jest as they were ing about calls while getting rolled...
Yes, and Rip had a thigh bruise. It is just how the cookie crumbles.
Decided to take your advice and review the game.
Third Quarter:
11:16 Chauncey picks up his third foul for sitting on Duncan's head after he had possession of the ball on the floor. No benefit of the call here, since I hope that landing on some dude cons utes a foul.
11:09 Sheed picks up his fourth foul for hacking Ginobili on a lay-up attempt...Replays show it clearly to be a hack across the arms, not a touch foul. No "benefit of the call" here, no subjectivity...it was definitely a foul that still would have been called even if the game was in Detroit. Contrary to Ben's contention, Manu didn't travel. Game is tied at this point, by the way, before Detroit went up by 9.
10:20 Foul on Parker on a Rip drive...touch foul, and one.
9:26 Ben gets called for third foul on Duncan, flops to floor...really should have been a no-call. Does not effect game...no FTs, Ben not in foul trouble. Pistons lead, 42-39.
7:25 Parker scores, Billups flops, no call...no foul on either side. Detroit leads 48-41.
7:06 Touch foul called on Bowen.
6:18 Duncan put-back, fouled by McDyess, and one. Touch foul. Detroit leads 48-44
5:15 3-second violation on Duncan while McDyess was clutching and grabbing him. Can't really understand this call, but it certainly benefitted Detroit. Detroit leads 50-46.
4:58 Duncan fouls Ben Wallace...looked like a clean block, but there was incidental contact and it wasn't a horrible call. Certainly no more contact than McDyess' foul on Duncan. Benefit: Detroit. Detroit leads 50-46 after Wallace misses both freebies.
4:01 Duncan hacked by McDyess. This was another clear foul. It is revealed on that on the previous play when Duncan made his move to the hoop, he brushed McDyess' face with the ball as he pivoted. No foul called on Duncan, but no foul called on the ensuing shot when he received body contact and fell to the ground, so I guess they even each other out. Detroit leads 52-48.
3:30 Hamilton pushes Duncan in the body (clear on the replay) as he's shooting, and one. Detroit leads 52-51.
3:15 Barry called for foul on Hamilton's drive. Replay reveals it was incidental contact, a "touch foul." Benefit: Detroit. Detroit leads 53-51.
2:00 Billups fouled by Duncan. Block looked clean, might have been a little bit of contact. Benefit: Detroit. Detroit leads 55-53.
1:39 Ginobili: sick dunk. Tie game.
:54 Duncan's shot blocked by Wallace. Contact on arm. No call. Benefit: Detroit.
End of Third Quarter, scored tied at 57.
So from that review, I discovered a few things. One, San Antonio certainly didn't get the benefit of "touch fouls" at all. With only one or two exceptions, all of the fouls called on the Pistons were clear and obvious fouls. If either team benefitted from the calls in the third quarter, it was the Pistons, as can be seen from the log above. Second, Billups did not pick up his fourth foul in the third quarter; he played all 12 minutes. He didn't "have to go to the bench during the stretch in which Timmy took over." Third, Rasheed's fourth foul was a merciless hack, with no argument from him (surprisingly). While one or two of the other three fouls called on him in the first half might be suspect (although I haven't reviewed those calls yet), he is the only one to blame for picking up his fourth. Playing with three fouls, he should have known that he shouldn't go around hacking people.
The calls, at least in the third, went the Pistons way. Not to any significant degree, but they certainly benefitted more from the referrees than the Spurs did.But, YES, I believe had the calls gone the Pistons way a little more, they would have beaten the Spurs. I don't think that's disrespect to the Spurs, using conspiracy theory on officiating, or being a sore loser. It's just how some of us Pistons fans feel.
Let me just preface this by saying that I'm not trying to be antagonistic at all. I appreciate the fact that you say the Spurs won fair and square. But when you also assert that the Spurs were "getting the lucky breaks or the benefit of the calls," you are implicitly stating that the Spurs won not because of their skill or because they were the better team, but because an external factor pushed them past the Pistons. This claim certainly detracts from the performance of the Spurs in Game 7, and even though you recognize that "subjectivity is part of the game," you diminish the Spurs' accomplishment by saying they were lucky and got help from the refs. I think it is disrespectful to say that the particular subjectivity of the refs on that June night in San Antonio played any tangible role in their victory. It is it false to claim that the Spurs got more benefit than the Pistons did, regardless of the inherent subjectivity of the refs.Spurs won fair and square, and part of winning sometimes deals with getting the lucky breaks or the benefit of the calls. Officiating is a subjective thing, so while calls can be questioned, it doesn't mean we don't understand and accept that that subjectivity is part of the game.
As you will notice when you conduct your own review of the game, Detroit benefitted from a few touch-foul calls as well. The disparity in the calls in this game was not significant. And yes, if they called the game differently (i.e. if they called the game unevenly in favor of Detroit), then the outcome might have been different. But do not delude yourself: the refs did not call the game unevenly in favor of San Antonio. (Again, not trying to be antagonistic, but) the Spurs won because they were better than the Pistons. The Spurs did not receive any more benefit from the subjectivity of the refs than the Pistons did.The Spurs deserved the le last year. And, I don't think the referees handed game 7 to the Spurs.
HOWEVER ... do I feel that had the officiating been called a little bit differently, there would have been a different outcome? Absolutely. Just because I think there were a few touch-foul calls by the refs doesn't mean I think they handed the game to the Spurs. It just means that the Pistons were a little unfortunate with the calls, but that's the way the game goes, and we deal with it. It's part of the game. Doesn't mean we can't feel that our team would have won had we not gotten a couple of those cheap fouls.
The only thing that would have changed the outcome of that game is if Detroit had been a better team. But they weren't. And that's why they lost.
enough pistons fans the series is OVER. you can play the "spurs deserved to win but..." game bu you need to let it go. you lost so deal with it. the better team won.
one thing i will mention considering we are talking about the officiating in the finals is that every time duncan went up with the ball he either was pushed with both hands are bodied on the way up so actually ended up couple of feet farther from the basket. that is a foul.. this happened everytime he had the ball .. no one hear complained about that but it was obvious.. ..
Right, it's just all the other fans that complain about the calls...
You people have selective memories...
I think referee calls are a lot like politics and media coverage. Unless it's really blatent in your teams favor, it always seems like the other side is getting the better of it. Much like how NPR seems unbiased to a democrat, and fox news seems fair to a republican. Our own biases color how we see things, as we think things SHOULD go the way we WANT them to. I've fallen victim to blaming the refs at time for things, but if I catch myself I try to avoid it.
conqueso,
I haven't watched game 7 since it was played live. If you have the time, try to see the first half where Chauncey and Rasheed got their first few fouls. If in your most unbiased opionion, you think all of their fouls were legitimate, that's cool. I'm just saying there were a couple that could have easily gone the other way or not been called. That's the "benefit" of the call I'm talking about ... that it could have gone either way. Rasheed or Chauncey get one fewer foul--meaning ANY of their previous fouls called, they remain in the game when the Spurs make their run in the second half.
GeorgeGervin,
I've let it go and am content in the outcome of the game. A Spurs fans asked the question about whether Pistons fans really believed the refs handed the game to the Spurs when another Pistons fan made a comment. I was simply voicing my opinion in response to let that Spurs fan know how at least I feel about it. I wouldn't have even brought it back up hadn't two different Spurs fans asked questions regarding game 7.
Just trying to give an honest opinion and trying to answer their questions. It's really not that deep. No controversy. No blame. No sore reaction about the outcome. Just telling those Spurs fans what I think from a Pistons perspective.
Last edited by JamStone; 12-15-2005 at 06:51 PM.
I hear your point, and to be fair, I've felt the same way about many many many Spurs losses in the past. I also think that if I had spent my entire life living in Detroit instead of San Antonio, I would feel exactly the same way you do.
When finals are over, I'll watch that first half of game 7 again, paying special attention to the fouls called on the Pistons. I'm still not convinced, but we'll see.
Good luck on X-Mas (or as the media is hyping it, "Game 8")
Going into Christmas day game,
I expect the Pistons to be 21 - 3,
and the Spurs 22-5, or 23 - 4 at best.
i think the pistons will be getting more for this game than the spurs win. also they are playing much better than SA is right now. and since the game is 10 days away and duncan has some heel issues, i wouldn't be surprised to see the pistons take it
The refs had a of a lot less to do with how game 7 ended than Larry Brown did. He was the moron that put Sheed AND Dice on the bench with 4 fouls each in the 3rd. At that point in that type of game you need to go all out. Leave Dice in to guard Duncan. Worst case scenario is he fouls out in a few minutes (But that is still unlikely) and you bring in Sheed. If the refs have the balls to foul out our entire frontline on cheapy fouls in that type of game, then they might as well shut down the league.
THAT coaching move was the turning point of the game, and effectively lost the series for the Pistons. That's why I'm glad Larry is gone. He pulled the same crap against the Nets in '04 (not putting in Okur in 3OT when our entire starting lineup was fouled out just because he doesn't like him, we ended up losing) and against the Heat in '05 (Pulled Tayshaun for the entire 2nd quarter because he had 2 fouls, we were killed in that quarter, and Tayshaun didn't pick up another foul the rest of the game, we lost).
________
The Cliff Condominium
Last edited by FreshPrince22; 09-12-2011 at 02:21 PM.
QFT!
(quoted for truth)
The fouls were cheap, but Brown ultimately ed that up. Period.
Blaming refs for losing games is silly (although i was guilty at the time).
well i am assuming your not referring to me because if the spurs had lost i certainly would have not blamed the loss on tim duncan being continually fouled.. you on the other hand seem to place an awful lot of responsibilty on the referees for the pistons losing the series. spurs made the plays when they had to and the pistons did not. very simple.
He is not talking about overall series. He is saying that when they call a foul on your team, and you start talking about how it is a bs call. Every team has fans like that.
And as said, LB ultimately lost us game 7. Tayshaun Prince and Ben Wallace as your power forward and center, against Horry and Duncan...both taller than the 4-5 we had going. Horrible. Throw Darko or Elden in there...and Duncan would not have had such easy looks at the basket when Tay had to switch on him.
Ddeeetttrroooiiittt Bassketbaaaallll
Pistons Keep Rolling Beat Memphis, Face Portland Tonight, While The Spurs Are Losing To Teams Like The Hawks And Hornets.(nothing Again Them,its Just That If The Spurs Wanna Be An Elite Team They Have To Win Those Games)
Pistons lost to those same teams last year.........
And the Spurs are already an ELITE team.
Umm... typically a team is elite by virtue of being the defending champion.
"being the defending champion."
They would be an elite team if they were playing like the defending champion, rather than ing around for 2 or 3 months like they do every year, playing bad and losing to (EC) lottery teams.
Same old Spurs, nothing "special" about this Spurs season so far.
With with all the rotation returning, some of us were hoping for better, we'll get over it.
Pistons currently losing to Portland by 5 with 5 to go.
Pistons win by 4.
The Pistons have not played the Spurs, Heat, Pacers, Cavs, or Wolves yet.....the only good team they have played (Dallas) blew them out, the Pistons are not as good as their record, they maybe 20-3 but they are only a .500 team.....
Did you forget you are supposed to be a Pistons fan for a second?
Oops... wrong screen name?
Instant Classic
are you on crack?? Pistons played Twice as many game on the road then at home.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions