Joe Crawford To Ref Celtic-Laker Game today

[hilltopchamps]

I hope Celtic fans remember game 7 of the Finals last year. With the Celtics up for most of the game, it was time for Joe Crawfraud to work his magic. With the Lakers not hitting a good part of their FG, it was time to send them to the free throw line , oh about 16 times in the 4th quarter. In the total game the Lakers had 37 free throw attempts to the Celtics just 17. All of a sudden the Lakers played stellar defense. I really doubt it. As the Celtics would drive to hoop late in the 4th quarter, and were fouled, Joe Crawfraud whistle was dead silent. It took 8 guys to be the Celtics that night. Just the way the league wanted it.

[Bahku]

Ugh.

[nba is the worst]

Fact check:

FT's in the 4th Q was actually 21-6 Lakers.

The Celtics actually shot mostly jumpers in the 4th, while the Lakers continued to "drive to the hoop".

The fouls were many and obvious. A few bad calls/missed calls, as is typical for the home team.

The real issue is that they called fouls that were no-calls in the 1st half, and the C's were in the penalty just inside of the 6 minute mark.

[Roy H.]

 
The real issue is that they called fouls that were no-calls in the 1st half, and the C's were in the penalty just inside of the 6 minute mark.

That's what I didn't like.  I mean, if you go by the rule book, there are probably 100+ fouls every game.  Usually, though, the refs let a certain number of those fouls go, to allow some flow to the game.  The teams figure out how quickly the game will be called, and then adjust to it.

In this game, for three quarters the game was called fairly loosely, with both teams allowed to play physically.  Those were the established rules of the game, essentially.  Then, in the fourth quarter -- with the Lakers trailing -- the rules suddenly changed.  The refs started calling ticky-tack fouls, especially on the Celtics.  To the extent that there were bad / missed calls, those went against the Celtics.

I usually don't buy into the conspiracy theories where the refs favor one team to win.  However, Game 7 was one game that I truly believe that the refs changed their style of officiating to achieve -- or at least favor -- one result:  a Lakers victory.  The Celtics suddenly weren't allowed to play their defense, which made it very likely that the Lakers would be able to catch up.

[ManchesterCelticsFan]

 
The real issue is that they called fouls that were no-calls in the 1st half, and the C's were in the penalty just inside of the 6 minute mark.

That's what I didn't like.  I mean, if you go by the rule book, there are probably 100+ fouls every game.  Usually, though, the refs let a certain number of those fouls go, to allow some flow to the game.  The teams figure out how quickly the game will be called, and then adjust to it.

In this game, for three quarters the game was called fairly loosely, with both teams allowed to play physically.  Those were the established rules of the game, essentially.  Then, in the fourth quarter -- with the Lakers trailing -- the rules suddenly changed.  The refs started calling ticky-tack fouls, especially on the Celtics.  To the extent that there were bad / missed calls, those went against the Celtics.

I usually don't buy into the conspiracy theories where the refs favor one team to win.  However, Game 7 was one game that I truly believe that the refs changed their style of officiating to achieve -- or at least favor -- one result:  a Lakers victory.  The Celtics suddenly weren't allowed to play their defense, which made it very likely that the Lakers would be able to catch up.

That's the way I saw it. It's sickening that the league manipulates games and series outcomes like that. Don't forget the Orlando series when C's unexpectedly went up 3-0 so the refs allowed Dwight Howard to throw his elbows, knocking down KG, giving Quis and Big Baby concussions without any fouls and free-throws awarded just to extend the series to 6 games. Then in game 6, the refs predictably called the game fairly to ensure a higher rating C's-Lakers NBA Finals.

Hopefully all our guys are healthy, especially the core four plus Perk/Shaq/Baby and/or JO/Semih to pound Bynum and Gasol into submission if the Lakers get past the Spurs this year.

[Junkyard Dawg]

I usually don't buy into the conspiracy theories where the refs favor one team to win

Agreed.  Unless it involves Lakers in postseason deciding games (see 2002 Western Conference Finals)

[Scalablob990]

Lakers by 5 -_-

[Onslaught]

I'm not a fan of Crawford. But he didn't cost us game 7. Not getting rebounds kill Boston. Taking jump shots and not getting to the line killed us. And running out of gas so you play bad D and foul killed us.

And playing bad for most of the year and not getting home court didn't help all that much.

[Junkyard Dawg]

Not getting rebounds kill Boston. Taking jump shots and not getting to the line killed us. And running out of gas so you play bad D and foul killed us.

In a 4 point game that we lost after being up for most of it, you can say anything cost us the game.  A single turnover could have changed the outcome.  One, single, made shot.  One offensive rebound.  One corrupt official in the pocket of David stern.  A draft in the building, to blow Artest's miracle 3 pointer a centemeter to the right.  These are the things we will have to live with forever.

[hpantazo]

Not getting rebounds kill Boston. Taking jump shots and not getting to the line killed us. And running out of gas so you play bad D and foul killed us.

In a 4 point game that we lost after being up for most of it, you can say anything cost us the game.  A single turnover could have changed the outcome.  One, single, made shot.  One offensive rebound.  One corrupt official in the pocket of David stern.  A draft in the building, to blow Artest's miracle 3 pointer a centemeter to the right.  These are the things we will have to live with forever.

you forgot to add having a healthy Perkins

[mmbaby]

I'm in agreement with Roy for this one.

We were not playing poorly, needing to rebound more, etc. any more than usual. We were certainly good enough to make it to Game 7 of the Final Final. So don't say we weren't good enough.
It was fully the refs and proven by the numbers and our very own eyes.

[RMO]

In the total game the Lakers had 37 free throw attempts to the Celtics just 17.

But how many more shot attempts did the lakers have because of all the offensive rebounds?  More shot attempts would lead to more opportunities to be fouled and thus, more free throw attempts.  I'd be more interested to know what the difference in the percentage of free throw attempts to field goal attempts was between the two teams (but not interested enough to actually look it up myself).

I don't disagree that somewhere in the second half the refs decided out of the blue to start calling it tight and for a physical team like the Celtics that did not bode well.  Nor do I disagree that in my 25 years of watching basketball the lakers have been the recipient of some very favorable calls at critical moments in big games.  I just don't understand what the motive would be for the NBA to orchestrate a conspiracy to aide the lakers at this juncture in the series.  It was game 7 of the finals.  Neither the series nor the season could have been extended and there was no danger of a small market team advancing.  It's not like it was the conference finals against some small market team who had a 3-2 lead going into game 6.

[Celtics4ever]

He is a crooked bastage!

Beat LA and beat the refs.

[NoraG1]

In the total game the Lakers had 37 free throw attempts to the Celtics just 17.

But how many more shot attempts did the lakers have because of all the offensive rebounds?  More shot attempts would lead to more opportunities to be fouled and thus, more free throw attempts.  I'd be more interested to know what the difference in the percentage of free throw attempts to field goal attempts was between the two teams (but not interested enough to actually look it up myself).

I don't disagree that somewhere in the second half the refs decided out of the blue to start calling it tight and for a physical team like the Celtics that did not bode well.  Nor do I disagree that in my 25 years of watching basketball the lakers have been the recipient of some very favorable calls at critical moments in big games.  I just don't understand what the motive would be for the NBA to orchestrate a conspiracy to aide the lakers at this juncture in the series.  It was game 7 of the finals.  Neither the series nor the season could have been extended and there was no danger of a small market team advancing.  It's not like it was the conference finals against some small market team who had a 3-2 lead going into game 6.

So every offensive rebound they got came in the 4th quarter? Because that is the issue Celtics had the lead in the 4th and the refs changed the rules with the foul calling. That is what changed the game.

[RMO]

In the total game the Lakers had 37 free throw attempts to the Celtics just 17.

But how many more shot attempts did the lakers have because of all the offensive rebounds?  More shot attempts would lead to more opportunities to be fouled and thus, more free throw attempts.  I'd be more interested to know what the difference in the percentage of free throw attempts to field goal attempts was between the two teams (but not interested enough to actually look it up myself).

I don't disagree that somewhere in the second half the refs decided out of the blue to start calling it tight and for a physical team like the Celtics that did not bode well.  Nor do I disagree that in my 25 years of watching basketball the lakers have been the recipient of some very favorable calls at critical moments in big games.  I just don't understand what the motive would be for the NBA to orchestrate a conspiracy to aide the lakers at this juncture in the series.  It was game 7 of the finals.  Neither the series nor the season could have been extended and there was no danger of a small market team advancing.  It's not like it was the conference finals against some small market team who had a 3-2 lead going into game 6.

So every offensive rebound they got came in the 4th quarter? Because that is the issue Celtics had the lead in the 4th and the refs changed the rules with the foul calling. That is what changed the game.

No.  The issue brought up that I quoted was the total free throws for the game and to dispute the notion that this discrepancy was due to some conspiracy by the refs and the NBA I pointed out that more offensive rebounds would lead to more shot attempts which would lead to more opportunities to draw a foul.  I agree that the refs all of a sudden started calling it tighter in the latter part of the game.  Not sure if I agree that it was done as part of some mass conspiracy to screw the Celtics.