Officiating question

[hodgy03038]

I posted this in the game thread last night but nobody answered because everyone was fired up talking about IT and his comments after the game.

Does anyone else think that this was strange? Is there any precedent?

I am still scratching my head over the replay that the officials looked at completely after a play had taken place. The ball was inbounded to Smart and the Celts came down and Crowder made that great layup high off the backboard and there was a foul. Prior to shooting the foul they are looking at the replay of the inbound pass and Smart. How can they do that well after a subsequent play and score? What if they called some sort of flagrant on the inbound – would they have taken away the basket AND foul and given the Suns foul shots and the ball. It doesn’t make any sense to me. It would be like in football throwing the red challenge flag out after a subsequent play. It just can’t happen.

[TheSundanceKid]

I believe it was to check if it was a Basketball play or not. They couldn't take away the bucket but they could have issued a flagrant, giving the Suns 2 free throws and the ball advanced to half court

[hodgy03038]

I believe it was to check if it was a Basketball play or not. They couldn't take away the bucket but they could have issued a flagrant, giving the Suns 2 free throws and the ball advanced to half court

How can they do that after a play had occurred? You say they couldn't take Crowder's basket away but he also had a freethrow coming. I can't see how they could make a ruling like that after a play had taken place. That would be similar to reviewing a challenge in football after a play had taken place. Just makes no sense. What is the cutoff for reviewing plays? Is there one? Can they review for flagrant fouls at halftime for something that happened in the 1st quarter?

[Celtics4ever]

How can they do that well after a subsequent play and score

Simple answer, it is not football.

[hodgy03038]

How can they do that well after a subsequent play and score

Simple answer, it is not football.

What kind of an answer is that? So you are saying it makes sense that they can review plays any time they want?

[TheSundanceKid]

I think it's because they were reviewing whether it was not a 'basketball play'. Not whether it was a foul. They can review those plays at the earliest opportunity if they miss them. If it had been an illegal screen that they had missed they wouldn't have been able to review it.

[hodgy03038]

I think it's because they were reviewing whether it was not a 'basketball play'. Not whether it was a foul. They can review those plays at the earliest opportunity if they miss them. If it had been an illegal screen that they had missed they wouldn't have been able to review it.

Okay. Thanks for the explanation but I still am concerned if it was considered a non-basketball play what the consequences would have been. Would they have taken away the basket AND the opportunity for a free throw to Crowder? Logic is that had they called it right away then the subsequent play wouldn't have happened. If it is wiped out that would be 3 points we lose plus they would get 2 free throws and the ball? That could have potentially been an 8-point turnaround worst case scenario.

[TheSundanceKid]

I think it's because they were reviewing whether it was not a 'basketball play'. Not whether it was a foul. They can review those plays at the earliest opportunity if they miss them. If it had been an illegal screen that they had missed they wouldn't have been able to review it.

Okay. Thanks for the explanation but I still am concerned if it was considered a non-basketball play what the consequences would have been. Would they have taken away the basket AND the opportunity for a free throw to Crowder? Logic is that had they called it right away then the subsequent play wouldn't have happened. If it is wiped out that would be 3 points we lose plus they would get 2 free throws and the ball? That could have potentially been an 8-point turnaround worst case scenario.

They would not have been able to wipe out Crowder's points or his free throw. They didn't call it on the floor so play continued. They then reviewed the play to see if there was any bad intent, that would have been separate to the flow of the game.

[A Future of Stevens]

I honestly don't care about the timing of officiating. As BB said, he doesn't care if the game is called by the book, or if everything is reviewable. As long as it is fair, then who cares?

[hodgy03038]

I honestly don't care about the timing of officiating. As BB said, he doesn't care if the game is called by the book, or if everything is reviewable. As long as it is fair, then who cares?

Yes it should be fair. Who is BB? Problem is that things that should be reviewable are not and random things are reviewed like that play last night. I mean who decided it was reviewable? How about the Cavs game where they ruled KO out of bounds when he clearly was not. That should be reviewable. It could have easily cost us the game. I mean fair is fair and it should not be selectable.

[A Future of Stevens]

I honestly don't care about the timing of officiating. As BB said, he doesn't care if the game is called by the book, or if everything is reviewable. As long as it is fair, then who cares?

Yes it should be fair. Who is BB? Problem is that things that should be reviewable are not and random things are reviewed like that play last night. I mean who decided it was reviewable? How about the Cavs game where they ruled KO out of bounds when he clearly was not. That should be reviewable. It could have easily cost us the game. I mean fair is fair and it should not be selectable.

Bill Belichick. Basically he said everything should be reviewable haha.

[The Oracle]

I honestly don't care about the timing of officiating. As BB said, he doesn't care if the game is called by the book, or if everything is reviewable. As long as it is fair, then who cares?

Yes it should be fair. Who is BB? Problem is that things that should be reviewable are not and random things are reviewed like that play last night. I mean who decided it was reviewable? How about the Cavs game where they ruled KO out of bounds when he clearly was not. That should be reviewable. It could have easily cost us the game. I mean fair is fair and it should not be selectable.

The K.O. play against Cleveland I believe the ref. ruled the ball hit the end line and from the replay I saw it looked like it probably did.

[hodgy03038]

I honestly don't care about the timing of officiating. As BB said, he doesn't care if the game is called by the book, or if everything is reviewable. As long as it is fair, then who cares?

Yes it should be fair. Who is BB? Problem is that things that should be reviewable are not and random things are reviewed like that play last night. I mean who decided it was reviewable? How about the Cavs game where they ruled KO out of bounds when he clearly was not. That should be reviewable. It could have easily cost us the game. I mean fair is fair and it should not be selectable.

The K.O. play against Cleveland I believe the ref. ruled the ball hit the end line and from the replay I saw it looked like it probably did.

Not sure where you got this from? Evidently the announcers didn't get this explanation either. That being said, if your explanation is correct who was the last team to touch the ball prior to it hitting the end line?

[Chief]

I thought that would be a league office review.

I too found it strange those knuckleheads reviewed it that much later.

Probably not the top crew in the league working a Sunday afternoon game in Phoenix.

[The Oracle]

I honestly don't care about the timing of officiating. As BB said, he doesn't care if the game is called by the book, or if everything is reviewable. As long as it is fair, then who cares?

Yes it should be fair. Who is BB? Problem is that things that should be reviewable are not and random things are reviewed like that play last night. I mean who decided it was reviewable? How about the Cavs game where they ruled KO out of bounds when he clearly was not. That should be reviewable. It could have easily cost us the game. I mean fair is fair and it should not be selectable.

The K.O. play against Cleveland I believe the ref. ruled the ball hit the end line and from the replay I saw it looked like it probably did.

Not sure where you got this from? Evidently the announcers didn't get this explanation either. That being said, if your explanation is correct who was the last team to touch the ball prior to it hitting the end line?

I can't remember when or what the play was now or I would post it here?