Play by PLay of All Calls to Close games. . .

[APG]

It should be noted that one of those INC's was noted with a *...which means:

Calls that are indirectly related to the outcome (e.g., a non-call on contact away from the play) and/or plays that are only observable with the help of a stop-watch, zoom or other technical support, but have some merit in reporting, are denoted with an *.

[Raymond]

Is there a link to the actual reports?

[APG]

Each nights reports are posted in the morning here:

http://official.nba.com/

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by APG

Each nights reports are posted in the morning here:

http://official.nba.com/

On the Harden play, surprised they didn't rotate. I believe Lead would have seen foul if he rotated, and would have pulled Malloy down into an open look.

[Jay R]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

On the Harden play, surprised they didn't rotate. I believe Lead would have seen foul if he rotated, and would have pulled Malloy down into an open look.

Tough angle for C and L.

By the way, Malloy way not on the game.

[APG]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

On the Harden play, surprised they didn't rotate. I believe Lead would have seen foul if he rotated, and would have pulled Malloy down into an open look.

NBA mechanics dictate no rotations under 5 seconds on the shot clock.

Also would be a hell of a get for Malloy...seeing as he wasn't even on the game.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by APG

NBA mechanics dictate no rotations under 5 seconds on the shot clock.

Also would be a hell of a get for Malloy...seeing as he wasn't even on the game.

Oh, saw kinda tall and didn't look hard. Assuming that would be Lane then.

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Oh, saw kinda tall and didn't look hard. Assuming that would be Lane then.

Plus Lane is black and Malloy is white. Well, technically ginger.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by APG

It should be noted that one of those INC's was noted with a *...which means:

Calls that are indirectly related to the outcome (e.g., a non-call on contact away from the play) and/or plays that are only observable with the help of a stop-watch, zoom or other technical support, but have some merit in reporting, are denoted with an *.

So, they're considering calls that are hard to see under live circumstances but actually incorrect in their reports as INC or IC (noting that they were probably very hard to see). Note, they are still calling them incorrect and being hard to tell doesn't make them correct.

Sounds a lot like they don't agree with the philosophy promoted in some discussions here where the value of slo-mo/stop-frame video in determining the correctness of a call is dismissed with something like "if it takes slo-mo to see it, it didn't happen".

[Pantherdreams]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

So, they're considering calls that are hard to see under live circumstances but actually incorrect in their reports as INC or IC (noting that they were probably very hard to see). Note, they are still calling them incorrect and being hard to tell doesn't make them correct.

Sounds a lot like they don't agree with the philosophy promoted in some discussions here where the value of slo-mo/stop-frame video in determining the correctness of a call is dismissed with something like "if it takes slo-mo to see it, it did happen".

This. Welcome to the technological/data driven age of accountability not coming to a high school/middle school near you tomorrow but . . . just not being able to see it doesn't mean it didn't happen and that you made the right call.

[jpgc99]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

This. Welcome to the technological/data driven age of accountability not coming to a high school/middle school near you tomorrow but . . . just not being able to see it doesn't mean it didn't happen and that you made the right call.

I'm not going to put a microscope on any of my plays or cut video frame by frame. But I agree that we are now in the age of technology-driven accountability, even at the youth and rec-league level. It is unfortunate to see websites like deadspin post video stories showing bad calls made by officials making $15 per game.

I don't even like seeing this at the high school level, where yes, there should be accountability of officials. But it certainly doesn't need to be at a national scale.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by jpgc99

I'm not going to put a microscope on any of my plays or cut video frame by frame. But I agree that we are now in the age of technology-driven accountability.

I observed two of my friends working a state tournament game a few nights ago. Lead official was watching two players, A1, and B1, contesting a rebound. B1 has good inside position. A1 bumps B1 trying to get the rebound. Both players reach for the ball and the ball goes out of bounds off B1's fingers. Lead calls out of bounds on A1 and gives the ball to B for a throwin.

This is an "old school" call, the Lead figuring that giving the ball to B makes up for not calling the pushing foul on A1. Thirty-plus years ago, this was considered the "correct" compromise call.

We can't do this anymore. With most games being taped, and with almost everyone in the bleachers having a video recorder in their cell phone, we can't get away with this anymore.

We have to fish, or cut bait. Either call the pushing foul on A1, or call the push incidental, and correctly call the out of bounds off of B1, and give the ball to A for a throwin. In my opinion, a third choice (getting out of the boat) no longer exists.