GS/NO end of overtime

[ODog]

How about the Curry 3 with 11 seconds left in regulation to cut it to 107-105? An absolute travel under basketball rules, but was not sure about its legality in the NBA.

Video would help, of course, but he pump faked, then took a full step to the right, lifting and putting his right foot down first, then doing the same with his left (pivot) foot. Replays were weak and not so conveniently left the feet out of the frame, but it was obvious enough live.

Any insight?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by ODog

How about the Curry 3 with 11 seconds left in regulation to cut it to 107-105? An absolute travel under basketball rules, but was not sure about its legality in the NBA.

Video would help, of course, but he pump faked, then took a full step to the right, lifting and putting his right foot down first, then doing the same with his left (pivot) foot. Replays were weak and not so conveniently left the feet out of the frame, but it was obvious enough live.

Any insight?

And the NBA has now said that Curry was fouled on his game-tying 3pt shot in the last seconds of regulation.
NBA says Warriors guard Stephen Curry was fouled on tying 3-pointer in Game 3

With all the video reviews that it does have, the NBA makes no provisions for getting a foul call correct on potentially the games last shot. What a joke! If an official were to get blocked out the team just has to live with it on a jumpshot, but if the play is an OOB that isn't seen, then video can be consulted. Nonsense.

In other news the League released its new slogan: NBA basketball -- it's just entertainment for silly rich people.

[tmagan]

The NBA said the 'away from the play' foul should have been a common foul. That looked like a textbook 'away from the play foul' which is why I am against the rule in the first place and definitely expanding it for the whole game as Silver wants to do. No one agrees on what 'away from the play' actually means.

[so cal lurker]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

With all the video reviews that it does have, the NBA makes no provisions for getting a foul call correct on potentially the games last shot. What a joke! If an official were to get blocked out the team just has to live with it on a jumpshot, but if the play is an OOB that isn't seen, then video can be consulted. Nonsense.

Is there ANY video review in any sport that puts judgment calls into play. All the examples I can think of involve things that are objective calls (in/out, restraining arc, who touched, did the throw beat the runner, etc.).

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by so cal lurker

Is there ANY video review in any sport that puts judgment calls into play. All the examples I can think of involve things that are objective calls (in/out, restraining arc, who touched, did the throw beat the runner, etc.).

Catch or no catch in the NFL if the play involves controlling the ball.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Catch or no catch in the NFL if the play involves controlling the ball.

A catch in the NFL really isn't a judgment call. There are criteria that determine what is or isn't a legal catch. Replay just helps make sure the criteria are met.

For us, yes there are criteria for calling a foul but many times those criteria aren't concrete. For example, affecting RSBQ is judgment in many cases.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

A catch in the NFL really isn't a judgment call. There are criteria that determine what is or isn't a legal catch. Replay just helps make sure the criteria are met.

For us, yes there are criteria for calling a foul but many times those criteria aren't concrete. For example, affecting RSBQ is judgment in many cases.

Same with Flagrant Fouls, which are reviewable in both NBA and NCAA.

Seems that clear path fouls in the NBA require much judgment as the definition certainly isn't clear based upon the above discussion.

How about blocking the plate in MLB?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

...

Seems that clear path fouls in the NBA require much judgment as the definition certainly isn't clear based upon the above discussion.
...

You're basing the clarity of the NBA's clear path rule on a discussion within this forum?

[APG]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Seems that clear path fouls in the NBA require much judgment as the definition certainly isn't clear based upon the above discussion.

There is a clear set of criteria for a clear-path-to-the-basket foul:

1.) The play must originate in the backcourt (including a throw-in)

2.) There must be new team possession.

3.) The ball and the foul must occur between the top tip of the circle extended in the backcourt and the basket in the frontcourt.

4.) There must be no defender between the ball and player and the basket.

5.) Additionally, if the defender taking the foul is in the frontcourt before the offensive player, no clear path foul as occurred, regardless of if the defender fouls from the side or behind.

6.) The offensive player can not be deprived of an opportunity to score (the player can not be in the act of shooting).