Speaking physics the ball had to have hit the rim

[wdleehi]

It hit the shadow of the rim.

[DivingCowens]

In those types of cases, at that point in the game, a jump ball seems the most logical resolution.

Yeah, let's just change the rules.  It's easy to say that's not a clear "yes-no" call, but guess what, IT IS A YES-NO CALL!  Period.  The refs can't just throw their hands up and say, "well, gee, we didn't really see the play, so even though a guy had possession 100% after what MOST SEEMED to be the ball hitting the rim, let's just forget that and call a jump ball."  PLEEEEEAAAASSSSEEEE!!!!!!!!

Reffing IS a very hard job, and the hardest part is when you HAVE to make a call and stick to it.  Here, they had to make a call one way or another.  One ref clearly says that he saw it.  In those cases, where a call is required, they will defer to the ref that says that if for no other reason than deniability.  

Reffing has been terrible all around in these playoffs, but that didn't "cost them the game."  At best, it cost them a "chance" to get a lead.  We were already up just like we were when the "flagrant" against Rondo against Miller happened.  So they didn't get the ball, BIG FREAKIN DEAL!  They still would have had to hit a shot....

Which reminds me, you know why they lost?  I'll give you a hint... it has nothing to do with any ref's call the entire night....

1.  They didn't get a FG for the last almost 6 minutes (you do that in a close NBA game, YOU LOSE)
2. They softened up on defense and LET us get back in
3. They play with no heart against a team that is playing on fumes and heart

Who cares if the ball hit the rim (which I 100% think it did after zooming in and watching it 15 times on my 62" HDTV).  The call was made and we won.  Sore loser's complain about ref's.

[GeoDim]

The ball changed direction, so it would have had to hit the rim.  Who really cares anyway?  Leave this up for the losers in the Orlando Magic forums to cry about.

[vinnie]

In those types of cases, at that point in the game, a jump ball seems the most logical resolution.

Yeah, let's just change the rules.  It's easy to say that's not a clear "yes-no" call, but guess what, IT IS A YES-NO CALL!  Period.  The refs can't just throw their hands up and say, "well, gee, we didn't really see the play, so even though a guy had possession 100% after what MOST SEEMED to be the ball hitting the rim, let's just forget that and call a jump ball."  PLEEEEEAAAASSSSEEEE!!!!!!!!

Reffing IS a very hard job, and the hardest part is when you HAVE to make a call and stick to it.  Here, they had to make a call one way or another.  One ref clearly says that he saw it.  In those cases, where a call is required, they will defer to the ref that says that if for no other reason than deniability.  

Reffing has been terrible all around in these playoffs, but that didn't "cost them the game."  At best, it cost them a "chance" to get a lead.  We were already up just like we were when the "flagrant" against Rondo against Miller happened.  So they didn't get the ball, BIG FREAKIN DEAL!  They still would have had to hit a shot....

Which reminds me, you know why they lost?  I'll give you a hint... it has nothing to do with any ref's call the entire night....

1.  They didn't get a FG for the last almost 6 minutes (you do that in a close NBA game, YOU LOSE)
2. They softened up on defense and LET us get back in
3. They play with no heart against a team that is playing on fumes and heart

Who cares if the ball hit the rim (which I 100% think it did after zooming in and watching it 15 times on my 62" HDTV).  The call was made and we won.  Sore loser's complain about ref's.

TP for you. Great post.

[markketch]

While you may think that is the "common sense" solution, it is nowhere in the rules and as such it would never happen.

http://www.basketball.com/nba/rules/rule6.shtml#III

This wasn't a double foul, nor a loose ball, nor did the ball go out of bounds. There is no provision in the rules as to have a jump ball when there is a difference of opinion between refs. As such, the refs had two choices, and only two choices:

- rule that it was a 24 second violation and give the ball to the Magic.
- Rule that it was not a 24 second violation, in which case the whistle that stopped the play was an inadvertent whistle and its celtics ball.

I wasn't trying to say there's a rule that calls for a jump ball, I was merely saying that's what it SHOULD be.

[markketch]

Yeah, let's just change the rules.  It's easy to say that's not a clear "yes-no" call, but guess what, IT IS A YES-NO CALL!  Period.  The refs can't just throw their hands up and say, "well, gee, we didn't really see the play, so even though a guy had possession 100% after what MOST SEEMED to be the ball hitting the rim, let's just forget that and call a jump ball."  PLEEEEEAAAASSSSEEEE!!!!!!!!

Why not change the rule?  There's instant replay on other plays, as well as jump balls when balls are tipped out of bounds and officials cannot determine who touched it last. Why not let the officials get the call right if there's disagreement as to what happened? This clearly wasn't a yes-no call, which is why it took the officials a bit to discuss and ultimately change the call.  The end decision is a yes-no (obviously), but what leads up to that decision is muddled together and not straightforward.

There is no harm in implementing a rule to either 1) review via video or 2) if an inconclusive agreement is reached, resort to a jump ball.

Also, saying "what MOST SEEMED" is a gross exaggeration. Yes, most Celtics fans have that opinion, but go elsewhere in the league and you're going to find it split 50-50.

Which reminds me, you know why they lost?  I'll give you a hint... it has nothing to do with any ref's call the entire night....

I've already acknowledged why the Magic lost.  Perhaps it was in another thread.

My point isn't arguing that this play cost them the game, my point is that clearly a better system needs to be implemented for plays of this sort.

Who cares if the ball hit the rim (which I 100% think it did after zooming in and watching it 15 times on my 62" HDTV).

Lots of people care because it was a controversial call that many think wasn't 100% correct.  You're operating under your opinion that it hit the rim, and other people are operating under the opinion that it did NOT hit the rim (Celtics fans included).  The play has not been presented in a way that is conclusive to either argument, but we're entitled to discuss what we think.

Oh, and I'd love a screen shot or video showing definitively that the ball hit the rim.  I watched the game in HD on a 46" Sony Bravia XBR and I can't tell.

[vagrantwade]

Well it would help if TNT would stop showing the angle that makes it look like the ball did nothing after it hit. Every other angle shows it scraping down and to the right.

[GeoDim]

If anyone got boned on this call, it was the Celts.  IMO the ball definitely hit the rim, as its trajectory changed.  Perk had the ball right under the hoop.  This call forced them to take it out from the side.

The refs didn't blow Orlando's 14 point lead, regardless of what SVG thinks.

[DivingCowens]

You're operating under your opinion that it hit the rim, and other people are operating under the opinion that it did NOT hit the rim (Celtics fans included).  The play has not been presented in a way that is conclusive to either argument, but we're entitled to discuss what we think.

Ummmm, I am not operating under my opinion that it hit the rim, I am operating under the FACT that the REFS SAID IT HIT THE RIM!

That is all that matters now.  And "why not change the rules?"...

Are you for real?
At the end of a playoff game you think the NBA should be changing it's rules?
Seriously?

You're free to discuss what you think all you want, but with all due respect, "and remember I am saying with all due respect" (Talledega Nights, 2006), that is just about the most asinine thing I have ever heard.

[BballTim]

One of the refs must have clearly thought it hit the rim, which is why it wasn't a jump ball.

And I recorded the 4th quarter of the game on my computer. I've watched it a dozen times. not including the replays.

There are 3 officials, so in that case you would think 2 of them would have to agree that the ball hit the rim to overturn the call on the court. The official nearest the rim ruled that it did not hit the rim, so it came away from the ball.

The play was so close that it SHOULD have been a jump ball. The probability that one official clearly saw it hit the rim, yet that action managed to evade several replays, is highly unlikely.

You've watched it a dozen times, but you're also highly subject to rater bias.  It was in no way an obvious "yes-no" play, which is why even Celtics fans can't agree on what happened.

To definitively say it hit the rim from the replays we all saw would be silly. It's ok to admit that the Celtics were the benefactors of a very close call which appeared to be improperly overturned given the situation. The Magic still failed on several other fronts, which ultimately cost them the game.

  Howard had at least 2 major traveling violations in the first quarter. Rondo got fouled before he fouled Howard and went to the bench with 4 fouls. Things even out, although it certainly looked like the ball changed directions.

[markketch]

Ummmm, I am not operating under my opinion that it hit the rim, I am operating under the FACT that the REFS SAID IT HIT THE RIM!

No, it was the referees opinion that it hit the rim.  I've still yet to see conclusively that the ball hit the rim, thus my opinion is that it did not.  Just because the officials ruled it one way does not mean it's a "fact".  2+2 = 4 is a fact.  The ball hitting or not hitting the rim is an opinion.  There's a big difference. Show me the ball hitting the rim, then it's a fact.  An officials opinion is just that, an opinion.

That is all that matters now.  And "why not change the rules?"...

Are you for real?
At the end of a playoff game you think the NBA should be changing it's rules?
Seriously?

Where the heck did you get that from? Where did I say the rule should be changed at the end of the game? I'm talking about implementing a new rule for the future so there's clarity and conviction, not mystery and disagreement.

[markketch]

Howard had at least 2 major traveling violations in the first quarter. Rondo got fouled before he fouled Howard and went to the bench with 4 fouls. Things even out, although it certainly looked like the ball changed directions.

These points have nothing to do with what I'm talking about.  There are missed calls in every game, but this type of play is probably one that should either be reviewable or could possibly result in a jump ball if it's inconclusive.  Currently, both options does not exist.

[dlpin]

Why not change the rule?  There's instant replay on other plays, as well as jump balls when balls are tipped out of bounds and officials cannot determine who touched it last. Why not let the officials get the call right if there's disagreement as to what happened? This clearly wasn't a yes-no call, which is why it took the officials a bit to discuss and ultimately change the call.  The end decision is a yes-no (obviously), but what leads up to that decision is muddled together and not straightforward.

 

Because that is an absolutely terrible idea. In fact, it is positively the worst idea about what to do about blown calls.

It would be just as burdensome, momentum killing, and game delaying as a full blown replay challenge system, but with none of the fairness.

In fact, it would add to the confusion and the complaints about officiating. People would complain not only about the call, but about how sure the refs were of the call in order to demand a jumpball or not.

What sorts of questionable calls should get jumpballs? If two refs think one way and one the other, should we get a jump ball? If 1 think one way and the other 2 didnt see, should we get a jumpball? People would be discussing not only the actual call, but their certainty. Instant replays wouldn't be enough to settle disputes after the fact, as people would still argue that there was no way for the refs to be sure, etc.

[crownsy]

No, it was the referees opinion that it hit the rim.  I've still yet to see conclusively that the ball hit the rim, thus my opinion is that it did not. 

thats great and all, but your opnion doesn't matter, nor does anyone else's but the three guys on the floor. They got togeter and said it hit the rim. I agree with them, but who cares?

They got together and made thier call, outside opnions don't matter.

[BballTim]

Difficult call for the refs. There was a blatant travel violation by Howard in the 1st half that they forgot to call. Referees just make mistakes.

There are blown calls every game, but do you not think that confusion on a 24 second call should at least resort to a jump ball? It wasn't like one official called it right away, they had to huddle for a bit to make the decision. 

In those types of cases, at that point in the game, a jump ball seems the most logical resolution.

  The fact that they had to huddle doesn't mean that it should be a jump ball. Someone had a good enough view to overrule whoever blew his whistle.