That Anthony Parker 3 Pointer Counts

[Jon Niednagel]

Why should the shot have counted?  I don't get it.  I don't believe the clock started when he touched the ball.  The only reason it counted (from what I understand)is that the refs only reviewed the tape where it looked like he got it off in time, but was not able to check to see if the clock started when he touched the ball.

What he said.

Actually, I think it is what SHE said (if memory serves).

[rondo987]

Clearly it was more than one full second, but shot clocks are not measured in tenths of a second, so there could have been 1.9 seconds left on the clock (even though at that I would think the clock would have still showed 2 seconds). to do?

You're wrong on this one, if the shot clock showed 1 it was between .1-1.00 seconds remaining. If 1.1-2.00 seconds were left it would show 2.

It was the lag in human reaction that allowed Parker to get that shot off, nothing more. Nothing to do about it either, its impossible to accurately time such things using humans. Human reaction time does not percieve tenths of seconds accurately.

I beleive I mentioned that in my post, that it would make more sense that the clock would have read 2 seconds had there been 1.9 on the clock... So I agree with that, and that it was the clock keeper's fault.

[Fafnir]

Clearly it was more than one full second, but shot clocks are not measured in tenths of a second, so there could have been 1.9 seconds left on the clock (even though at that I would think the clock would have still showed 2 seconds). to do?

You're wrong on this one, if the shot clock showed 1 it was between .1-1.00 seconds remaining. If 1.1-2.00 seconds were left it would show 2.

It was the lag in human reaction that allowed Parker to get that shot off, nothing more. Nothing to do about it either, its impossible to accurately time such things using humans. Human reaction time does not percieve tenths of seconds accurately.

I beleive I mentioned that in my post, that it would make more sense that the clock would have read 2 seconds had there been 1.9 on the clock... So I agree with that, and that it was the clock keeper's fault.

I'm afraid you don't understand. The shot clock is its own closed system. whenever a ref raises his hand our whistles its set to stop. This is all handled by the electronic system.

So when the play was blown dead previously there was at most 1.0 seconds left on the shot clock. Mechanically anything else is impossible. There is no system where the clock is changed to "show" a particular time unless the refs mandate it being set. In which case its a flat 1,2,3,14 seconds.

The problem can only have been on starting the clock.

[rayallen1934]

I know this game is done, but just show you an example of how the league should do better at these types of situations and not rush. Watch the ball go out of bounds and look at the shot clock easily at least 2.5 seconds left on the SC, im surprised nobody on the board pointed this out

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdQUII_8fJY

[Prof. Clutch]

Why should the shot have counted?  I don't get it.  I don't believe the clock started when he touched the ball.  The only reason it counted (from what I understand)is that the refs only reviewed the tape where it looked like he got it off in time, but was not able to check to see if the clock started when he touched the ball.

What he said.

Actually, I think it is what SHE said (if memory serves).

My bad.  What he or she said. 

[nba is the worst]

I know this game is done, but just show you an example of how the league should do better at these types of situations and not rush. Watch the ball go out of bounds and look at the shot clock easily at least 2.5 seconds left on the SC, im surprised nobody on the board pointed this out

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdQUII_8fJY

You might be right that a second ticked off after the ball was knocked out - but to me, it looks like even if it didn't, Parker's catch and shoot was within 1 second.

I don't understand those fans claiming that it was obvious that it started late, etc...

[pearljammer10]

Yeah, I mean from that clip and that angle it definitely makes it clear that Parker didn't take more then 1 second to get that shot off.

[Redz]

when did they do away with the tenths of a second on the 24 second clock in the last few seconds?

[nba is the worst]

when did they do away with the tenths of a second on the 24 second clock in the last few seconds?

As far as I can recall, the shot clock never had tenths - but at my age, I could be wrong...

[LB3533]

Parker's normal shooting stroke might have been within 1 second, but he brought the ball down to the ground which would be around an extra 0.3 to 0.5 second more.

The shot should not have counted.

I remember in 2002, Kobe hit a buzzer beater against us with 1.3 seconds and he got the shot off after he pumped faked once, waited, set his feet up and took his normal shot.

The shot was waived off because he could not have pumped fake and take a normal shot stroke within 1.3 seconds. Each action would have taken about 1 second each.

[nba is the worst]

Parker's normal shooting stroke might have been within 1 second, but he brought the ball down to the ground which would be around an extra 0.3 to 0.5 second more.

The shot should not have counted.

I remember in 2002, Kobe hit a buzzer beater against us with 1.3 seconds and he got the shot off after he pumped faked once, waited, set his feet up and took his normal shot.

The shot was waived off because he could not have pumped fake and take a normal shot stroke within 1.3 seconds. Each action would have taken about 1 second each.

You are mistaken. Please view the clip above (it's better to right-click and select watch on Youtube, so you can get full screen).

Not only did he NOT "(bring) the ball down to the ground", but by my "onethousandone" count, he released it in time.

[ACF]

It certainly did look like Parker got it off in time. Oh, well. Cleveland needed that win more than we did. Let's move on.

[rondo987]

Clearly it was more than one full second, but shot clocks are not measured in tenths of a second, so there could have been 1.9 seconds left on the clock (even though at that I would think the clock would have still showed 2 seconds). to do?

You're wrong on this one, if the shot clock showed 1 it was between .1-1.00 seconds remaining. If 1.1-2.00 seconds were left it would show 2.

It was the lag in human reaction that allowed Parker to get that shot off, nothing more. Nothing to do about it either, its impossible to accurately time such things using humans. Human reaction time does not percieve tenths of seconds accurately.

I beleive I mentioned that in my post, that it would make more sense that the clock would have read 2 seconds had there been 1.9 on the clock... So I agree with that, and that it was the clock keeper's fault.

I'm afraid you don't understand. The shot clock is its own closed system. whenever a ref raises his hand our whistles its set to stop. This is all handled by the electronic system.

So when the play was blown dead previously there was at most 1.0 seconds left on the shot clock. Mechanically anything else is impossible. There is no system where the clock is changed to "show" a particular time unless the refs mandate it being set. In which case its a flat 1,2,3,14 seconds.

The problem can only have been on starting the clock.

are you being serious? I just said i agree with you, and come back at me with saying that I don't understand? lol ok?

[Fafnir]

Clearly it was more than one full second, but shot clocks are not measured in tenths of a second, so there could have been 1.9 seconds left on the clock (even though at that I would think the clock would have still showed 2 seconds). to do?

You're wrong on this one, if the shot clock showed 1 it was between .1-1.00 seconds remaining. If 1.1-2.00 seconds were left it would show 2.

It was the lag in human reaction that allowed Parker to get that shot off, nothing more. Nothing to do about it either, its impossible to accurately time such things using humans. Human reaction time does not percieve tenths of seconds accurately.

I beleive I mentioned that in my post, that it would make more sense that the clock would have read 2 seconds had there been 1.9 on the clock... So I agree with that, and that it was the clock keeper's fault.

I'm afraid you don't understand. The shot clock is its own closed system. whenever a ref raises his hand our whistles its set to stop. This is all handled by the electronic system.

So when the play was blown dead previously there was at most 1.0 seconds left on the shot clock. Mechanically anything else is impossible. There is no system where the clock is changed to "show" a particular time unless the refs mandate it being set. In which case its a flat 1,2,3,14 seconds.

The problem can only have been on starting the clock.

are you being serious? I just said i agree with you, and come back at me with saying that I don't understand? lol ok?

Oops I misread your post. I thought you were restating your previous thoughts that it was 1.8 or more seconds left.

[Mike]

Parker's normal shooting stroke might have been within 1 second, but he brought the ball down to the ground which would be around an extra 0.3 to 0.5 second more.

The shot should not have counted.

I remember in 2002, Kobe hit a buzzer beater against us with 1.3 seconds and he got the shot off after he pumped faked once, waited, set his feet up and took his normal shot.

The shot was waived off because he could not have pumped fake and take a normal shot stroke within 1.3 seconds. Each action would have taken about 1 second each.

Hmm from what I remember, that shot counted and the Celtics lost...