Stopping play to review QUESTION

[Smitty77]

Did the refs follow the rules by stopping the Spurs from inbounding the ball with 5 seconds to go following Ray's three to review IF it was a three pointer?

If this was legal, the rule is horrifically flawed!!!  This gave Miami a chance to set their defense.  It was utter chaos after Ray's big shot and the Spurs were ready to inbound the ball and the Heat were in disarray.

Please tell me if the refs followed their own rule book. 

Second, if they did, what are your thoughts on this rule and the impact(s) on the game?

Thanks,

Smitty77

[Who]

They are allowed to do that. In the final two minutes I think it is allowed.

[JSD]

On the other side, it gave the Spurs a free timeout to draw up a play. Teams normally call timeouts after major shots like that are hit on them at the tail end of the game. Any advantage gained is given back.

Also, had Ray been credited for a 3 when it was really a 2, folks would have lost it.

[CelticG1]

On the other side, it gave the Spurs a free timeout to draw up a play. Teams normally call timeouts after major shots like that are hit on them at the tail end of the game. Any advantage gained is given back.

Also, had Ray been credited for a 3 when it was really a 2, folks would have lost it.

Yeah I heard jvg and Breen try and act like the Spurs got the benefit there. Yeah that's completely false.

If they had timeouts remaining than yes. The biggest reason why it hurt them is because the refs "timeout" didn't advance the ball so they had to go full court in 5 seconds with Miami d set during a dead ball.

Not saying there was an alternative just wanted to point out that that was clearly 100% disadvantage for the Spurs

[Smitty77]

Are they being serious??  The Heat were celebrating and Parker would have been past half court with almost 4 seconds to run a play.  Having that review was advantage Spurs??  Are these guys serious??

[Snakehead]

On the other side, it gave the Spurs a free timeout to draw up a play. Teams normally call timeouts after major shots like that are hit on them at the tail end of the game. Any advantage gained is given back.

Also, had Ray been credited for a 3 when it was really a 2, folks would have lost it.

Yeah I heard jvg and Breen try and act like the Spurs got the benefit there. Yeah that's completely false.

If they had timeouts remaining than yes. The biggest reason why it hurt them is because the refs "timeout" didn't advance the ball so they had to go full court in 5 seconds with Miami d set during a dead ball.

Not saying there was an alternative just wanted to point out that that was clearly 100% disadvantage for the Spurs

Exactly, if anything the Spurs got a bonus from the review.  But at the same time I don't know how you possibly stop this.  Maybe don't allow the players to go back to the bench?

Are they being serious??  The Heat were celebrating and Parker would have been past half court with almost 4 seconds to run a play.  Having that review was advantage Spurs??  Are these guys serious??

Yes?  You seriously think Miami would have been celebrating vs trying to play defense on that play if there was no stoppage in play?

Why do you think teams call time outs on offense to draw up a play or set at the end of games?

[CelticG1]

On the other side, it gave the Spurs a free timeout to draw up a play. Teams normally call timeouts after major shots like that are hit on them at the tail end of the game. Any advantage gained is given back.

Also, had Ray been credited for a 3 when it was really a 2, folks would have lost it.

Yeah I heard jvg and Breen try and act like the Spurs got the benefit there. Yeah that's completely false.

If they had timeouts remaining than yes. The biggest reason why it hurt them is because the refs "timeout" didn't advance the ball so they had to go full court in 5 seconds with Miami d set during a dead ball.

Not saying there was an alternative just wanted to point out that that was clearly 100% disadvantage for the Spurs

Exactly, if anything the Spurs got a bonus from the review.  But at the same time I don't know how you possibly stop this.  Maybe don't allow the players to go back to the bench?

Are they being serious??  The Heat were celebrating and Parker would have been past half court with almost 4 seconds to run a play.  Having that review was advantage Spurs??  Are these guys serious??

Yes?  You seriously think Miami would have been celebrating vs trying to play defense on that play if there was no stoppage in play?

Why do you think teams call time outs on offense to draw up a play or set at the end of games?

You are really missing the biggest point in all of this.

If the spurs called a timeout it would have advanced the ball.

They didn't have the time out so they were obviously going to push the ball up immediately with a disorganized defense.

The "timeout" by the refs DID NOT advance the ball and allowed miami to set up there d and the spurs to go full coourt with 5 seconds left on dead ball situation.

Obviously it still would have been hard for the Spurs but it is undoubtedly a hige disadvantage to the Spurs.

[LilRip]

i thought it was a disadvantage to the spurs. at that moment, Ray Allen was celebrating and screaming to the crowd. Wade had his hands up in the air in celebration. Leonard already had the ball on the sideline. Parker and Green were calling for it. Only a ref stepped in front of leonard to stop the play. You could hear popovich screaming "you can't do that!". he wasn't mic'd up at the time but he sure must've screamed loud for the other mics to pick it up.

[Smitty77]

Are you serious???  Neither team had a time out, first of all!!  Secondly, most teams call a full time out in that situation MOSTLY to advance the ball past half court to save time, since there was ONLY slightly more than 5 seconds on the clock.  BUT, they had NO timeout.

Did you watch the game?  Miami was not defensively ready.  Did you see the game?

Smitty77

[LooseCannon]

Please tell me if the refs followed their own rule book. 

Second, if they did, what are your thoughts on this rule and the impact(s) on the game?

To fully consider the impact of the rule, you have to consider what happens in cases where a shot ruled as a three was actually a two and a review would overrule the ruling on the court.

The rule creates a disadvantage in some situations and an advantage in other situations, so it might be a good rule if it tends to be good for the game more often than not allowing the refs to stop the clock and review the play. 

This analysis requires you to accept that it is possible that there is no way to write the rulebook in a way that is good for the game in all cases, so you have to accept that a good rule can sometimes hurt but the good outweighs the bad.

[letsgoblue86]

It also allowed Duncan to enter the game though...

[staticcc]

It's allowed under 2 minutes. Because if Ray had stepped on the line and they didn't check , they would be CRUCIFIED! So it's a lose-lose situation and it's better to make sure.

Pop inserting Duncan sneakily into the game would be a big story though if Spurs made a shot on that last play.

[kgainez]

I'm pretty sure the refs gave the signal for review after the three. I think the Spurs weren't paying attention and tried to force the ball in. Or one of the other refs didn't catch it...thus the choas. was very loud in there.

[celtsfan84]

It also allowed Duncan to enter the game though...

Which was illegal and should've been a technical foul on the Spurs for illegal substitution.

[CeltsPride]

It also allowed Duncan to enter the game though...

which was completely illegal.