What is this garbage about refs admitting missing calls at end of the game?

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

While I understand the opinion of the OP, I think in this case, people should be more angry at ESPN for writing such biased article.

1)  ESPN had egg on their face from us beating their pick.   They also did a hit job on Baynes getting dunked on.  We bucked their narrative that they have built up all year with the Process and face it, they discounted us.

2) It's much easier for Embiid to blame the refs, than say he choked up on that shot or that he spends too much time on the perimeter and not enough inside where his strengths lie.

3) Bad calls are bad for the game, yet they have happened for years.   Some refs like Tony Brothers are very biased in their calls.   Instant replay in the NBA allows us to see these shenanigans in detail and exposes the refs.   But bad calls hurt both teams.

I agree, bad calls are bad for the game. However, refs are calling these games in real time, not in slow motion instant replay. If you've ever reffed a game you know that it's nearly impossible to see what's going on when there's a cluster of players gathered in one area. You call it one way team A gets upset. You call it another way team B gets upset.

Tony might be a real bad ref or he's calling things in a way that other refs aren't. Maybe if we watched all his calls in slow motion and compare them to other refs we'd get a better picture than simply relying on stats.

If I could have played the stock market using instant replay I'd be the wealthiest man on Earth. Unfortunately, we live in a real time world. The slow down in play with the constant use of instant replay would be 10x more annoying than bad calls.

Bad calls hurt teams mostly when they are distributed unevenly.

I understand this and do sympathize with refs regarding this challenge, but what about the situations that are obvious fouls, even in real time, but don't get called? I think Baynes could've been called for a foul on Embiid, but it wasn't obvious ... whereas it seemed obvious that Saric bulldozed Smart in the post and McConnell ran into Tatum right before Tatum's layup.

At any rate, these last-two-minute reports aren't doing any good unless they lead to officials becoming better, which doesn't seem to be the case. For me, they seem to be as useful as rescinding technical fouls after the fact—it's great that mistakes are recognized, but it doesn't undo the damage that took place during the games.

[goz421]

My issue is that the last call on Embiid was subjective. You cant just get out of the way of the offensive player. Your entitled to your position and verticality. Brad Stevens teaches this as we'll as proper use of hands. Baynes did not swipe at the ball, he just used his body. I saw not foul. Smart did travel which is a different story. The refs should not get into the habit of subjecting their own officials to such subjective scrutiny. Your going to to start seeing games decided by ref whistles. This is not a good direction and will not end well. Mark my words.

[droopdog7]

My issue is that the last call on Embiid was subjective. You cant just get out of the way of the offensive player. Your entitled to your position and verticality. Brad Stevens teaches this as we'll as proper use of hands. Baynes did not swipe at the ball, he just used his body. I saw not foul. Smart did travel which is a different story. The refs should not get into the habit of subjecting their own officials to such subjective scrutiny. Your going to to start seeing games decided by ref whistles. This is not a good direction and will not end well. Mark my words.

Look at it again.  Baynes did not swipe down in a violent way, but his arms were far from vertical.  As Embiid went up, baynes' arms went down (essentially keeping Embiid from elevating).  It was a foul clear as day.  But why should you listen to me, the NBA already confirmed it.

As to holding your ground, this is an aspect of the game that does bug me.  I am not sure why an offensive player can simply bang and push a defender toward the basket in the way that Embiid does (for example).  In a play earlier in the game he was so aggressive against Horford that Al did all he could just to stay upright.  And they ended up calling a foul on Horford.

But this isn't necessarily a gripe on the officials, just that the "rules" don't seem to make sense to me.

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

My issue is that the last call on Embiid was subjective. You cant just get out of the way of the offensive player. Your entitled to your position and verticality. Brad Stevens teaches this as we'll as proper use of hands. Baynes did not swipe at the ball, he just used his body. I saw not foul. Smart did travel which is a different story. The refs should not get into the habit of subjecting their own officials to such subjective scrutiny. Your going to to start seeing games decided by ref whistles. This is not a good direction and will not end well. Mark my words.

I agree.

In principal, at least, basketball is supposed to be a (mostly) noncontact sport—offensive players are supposed to try to beat their defenders via quickness (going around them), deception (upfakes, etc.), or shooting over them—not by going through them. Offensive players in the post shouldn't be able to just repeatedly slam themselves into their defender (à la Shaq) until they're both under the rim and there's nothing the defender can do at that point. Today's NBA features way too many instances of offensive players initiating contact but the defenders getting called for the fouls.

[Kevins Gamble]

The overwhelming evidence was that the refs weren't going to bail either team out in the last couple of minutes.  They weren't going to give Smart the offensive foul he was looking for, nor bail Saric's crappy backdown move out either.  And if they weren't going to save Tatum when McConnell absolutely mugged him down low ten seconds earlier...they clearly weren't going to throw a lifeline to a 7ft center who's a foot from the basket and gets hit with less than vertical arms. 

And in an NBA game with three Euros and Ben Simmons running through the key on every play....how we're even entertaining the thought that Smart should have been called for travelling on his last play is beyond me.  Smart could have taken three more balance hops and it still wouldn't have been the most egregious (and non-called) case of travelling in the previous 48 minutes.

[goz421]

The overwhelming evidence was that the refs weren't going to bail either team out in the last couple of minutes.  They weren't going to give Smart the offensive foul he was looking for, nor bail Saric's crappy backdown move out either.  And if they weren't going to save Tatum when McConnell absolutely mugged him down low ten seconds earlier...they clearly weren't going to throw a lifeline to a 7ft center who's a foot from the basket and gets hit with less than vertical arms. 

And in an NBA game with three Euros and Ben Simmons running through the key on every play....how we're even entertaining the thought that Smart should have been called for travelling on his last play is beyond me.  Smart could have taken three more balance hops and it still wouldn't have been the most egregious (and non-called) case of travelling in the previous 48 minutes.

agreed, and its how to officials should let games play out.

[Alleyoopster]

While I understand the opinion of the OP, I think in this case, people should be more angry at ESPN for writing such biased article.

1)  ESPN had egg on their face from us beating their pick.   They also did a hit job on Baynes getting dunked on.  We bucked their narrative that they have built up all year with the Process and face it, they discounted us.

2) It's much easier for Embiid to blame the refs, than say he choked up on that shot or that he spends too much time on the perimeter and not enough inside where his strengths lie.

3) Bad calls are bad for the game, yet they have happened for years.   Some refs like Tony Brothers are very biased in their calls.   Instant replay in the NBA allows us to see these shenanigans in detail and exposes the refs.   But bad calls hurt both teams.

I agree, bad calls are bad for the game. However, refs are calling these games in real time, not in slow motion instant replay. If you've ever reffed a game you know that it's nearly impossible to see what's going on when there's a cluster of players gathered in one area. You call it one way team A gets upset. You call it another way team B gets upset.

Tony might be a real bad ref or he's calling things in a way that other refs aren't. Maybe if we watched all his calls in slow motion and compare them to other refs we'd get a better picture than simply relying on stats.

If I could have played the stock market using instant replay I'd be the wealthiest man on Earth. Unfortunately, we live in a real time world. The slow down in play with the constant use of instant replay would be 10x more annoying than bad calls.

Bad calls hurt teams mostly when they are distributed unevenly.

I understand this and do sympathize with refs regarding this challenge, but what about the situations that are obvious fouls, even in real time, but don't get called? I think Baynes could've been called for a foul on Embiid, but it wasn't obvious ... whereas it seemed obvious that Saric bulldozed Smart in the post and McConnell ran into Tatum right before Tatum's layup.

At any rate, these last-two-minute reports aren't doing any good unless they lead to officials becoming better, which doesn't seem to be the case. For me, they seem to be as useful as rescinding technical fouls after the fact—it's great that mistakes are recognized, but it doesn't undo the damage that took place during the games.

Good points especially about blatant fouls. My guess is there are multiple psychological factors going through the refs' minds during these intense moments. For example, Marcus has been known to dramatize hits. This type of factor, along with NBA late-game foul calling directives, etc., make their jobs tougher for them to navigate with a clear mind.

[Granath]

These two minute reports are stupid because unless the foul is egregious then there's something missing - the context in which the game was called up to that point.

Any competent ref in any sport shouldn't look at their watch, say "two minutes to go" and entirely change the way they call the game. Take for instance the last game. There were numerous fouls on Tatum throughout the game (including on that last basket) that went uncalled. Simmons consistently traveled all game. Should the refs suddenly change the entire way they called the game because there's a few seconds left and call Baynes for an *extremely* marginal foul or Smart on a travel with .5 seconds left after making a steal? Anyone who thinks that's what should happen is just asking for fans to revolt.

That's why these reports are useless. Context is everything.

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

These two minute reports are stupid because unless the foul is egregious then there's something missing - the context in which the game was called up to that point.

Any competent ref in any sport shouldn't look at their watch, say "two minutes to go" and entirely change the way they call the game. Take for instance the last game. There were numerous fouls on Tatum throughout the game (including on that last basket) that went uncalled. Simmons consistently traveled all game. Should the refs suddenly change the entire way they called the game because there's a few seconds left and call Baynes for an *extremely* marginal foul or Smart on a travel with .5 seconds left after making a steal? Anyone who thinks that's what should happen is just asking for fans to revolt.

That's why these reports are useless. Context is everything.

TP for this.

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

While I understand the opinion of the OP, I think in this case, people should be more angry at ESPN for writing such biased article.

1)  ESPN had egg on their face from us beating their pick.   They also did a hit job on Baynes getting dunked on.  We bucked their narrative that they have built up all year with the Process and face it, they discounted us.

2) It's much easier for Embiid to blame the refs, than say he choked up on that shot or that he spends too much time on the perimeter and not enough inside where his strengths lie.

3) Bad calls are bad for the game, yet they have happened for years.   Some refs like Tony Brothers are very biased in their calls.   Instant replay in the NBA allows us to see these shenanigans in detail and exposes the refs.   But bad calls hurt both teams.

I agree, bad calls are bad for the game. However, refs are calling these games in real time, not in slow motion instant replay. If you've ever reffed a game you know that it's nearly impossible to see what's going on when there's a cluster of players gathered in one area. You call it one way team A gets upset. You call it another way team B gets upset.

Tony might be a real bad ref or he's calling things in a way that other refs aren't. Maybe if we watched all his calls in slow motion and compare them to other refs we'd get a better picture than simply relying on stats.

If I could have played the stock market using instant replay I'd be the wealthiest man on Earth. Unfortunately, we live in a real time world. The slow down in play with the constant use of instant replay would be 10x more annoying than bad calls.

Bad calls hurt teams mostly when they are distributed unevenly.

I understand this and do sympathize with refs regarding this challenge, but what about the situations that are obvious fouls, even in real time, but don't get called? I think Baynes could've been called for a foul on Embiid, but it wasn't obvious ... whereas it seemed obvious that Saric bulldozed Smart in the post and McConnell ran into Tatum right before Tatum's layup.

At any rate, these last-two-minute reports aren't doing any good unless they lead to officials becoming better, which doesn't seem to be the case. For me, they seem to be as useful as rescinding technical fouls after the fact—it's great that mistakes are recognized, but it doesn't undo the damage that took place during the games.

Good points especially about blatant fouls. My guess is there are multiple psychological factors going through the refs' minds during these intense moments. For example, Marcus has been known to dramatize hits. This type of factor, along with NBA late-game foul calling directives, etc., make their jobs tougher for them to navigate with a clear mind.

I agree—there's probably a lot of stuff going through refs' minds in these situations. And yeah, Smart has hurt himself with his flopping. But the Saric offensive foul seemed (to me) as blatant as any foul could ever be—he rammed his shoulder into Smart, what? three times?

[Celtics4ever]

I agree, bad calls are bad for the game. However, refs are calling these games in real time, not in slow motion instant replay. If you've ever reffed a game you know that it's nearly impossible to see what's going on when there's a cluster of players gathered in one area. You call it one way team A gets upset. You call it another way team B gets upset.

That is very true, but if you or I did as poorly making decisions.   I wager we would not have a job.   I want a game called the same way for both sides.  It's hard, I get it but spare me the hyperbole.   Combat vet here who have seen decisions made that led to lives lost and taken.   This is a cakewalk, compared to that.   

Call the game by the rules, and this or that team does not have a leg to stand on call wise.

Some of these refs have definite biases against certain teams and players.   Those refs need to go the way of the dodo and never ref again.

I fully expect to get hosed some by the refs against the Cavs.   The league has always subsidized LeBron's greatness (and he really does not it)  with being allowed to travel and goal tend and numerous FTAs when he is having an off night.

To me the whole process of them admitting blown calls is downright silly and bad for the league.

[Alleyoopster]

I agree, bad calls are bad for the game. However, refs are calling these games in real time, not in slow motion instant replay. If you've ever reffed a game you know that it's nearly impossible to see what's going on when there's a cluster of players gathered in one area. You call it one way team A gets upset. You call it another way team B gets upset.

That is very true, but if you or I did as poorly making decisions.   I wager we would not have a job.   I want a game called the same way for both sides.  It's hard, I get it but spare me the hyperbole.   Combat vet here who have seen decisions made that led to lives lost and taken.   This is a cakewalk, compared to that.   

Call the game by the rules, and this or that team does not have a leg to stand on call wise.

Some of these refs have definite biases against certain teams and players.   Those refs need to go the way of the dodo and never ref again.

I fully expect to get hosed some by the refs against the Cavs.   The league has always subsidized LeBron's greatness (and he really does not it)  with being allowed to travel and goal tend and numerous FTAs when he is having an off night.

To me the whole process of them admitting blown calls is downright silly and bad for the league.

My guess is the refs are ordered, by the higher-ups, not to go by the rules. Instead, they must let a lot of things go. Otherwise, the game would take too long and/or disrupt ratings. If this is the case, then we can't entirely blame the refs. That's one reason I can explain why blatantly obvious violations are not being called. 

[jambr380]

Just as I suspected - on Around the Horn and PTI they only discussed the Baynes no-call and the Smart non-travel; there was no mention whatsoever of the no-calls on Saric and Embiid. In all of the debates, people basically poo-pooed the two-minute reports in general and think the Cs should feel good about their win, but the general public is not being presented with the whole story. This shouldn't even be a thing.

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

Just as I suspected - on Around the Horn and PTI they only discussed the Baynes no-call and the Smart non-travel; there was no mention whatsoever of the no-calls on Saric and Embiid. In all of the debates, people basically poo-pooed the two-minute reports in general and think the Cs should feel good about their win, but the general public is not being presented with the whole story. This shouldn't even be a thing.

Typical one-sided report.

[mctyson]

The last 2 minute report is a complete joke and should never be issued again.  If you want to have a real review of your ref performance, issue a full game report and run analyses on biases that they have against certain players, coaches, teams, home vs. road...etc.

NBA officiating is awfully managed.