ESPN: Greatest Beatdowns: #95 NBA Referees vs. Kings
- Thread starter Arco Arena
- Start date
- Status
Circa_1985_Fan
All-Star
yeah, now they just take notes from Joey Crawford's 'Combative Officiating'. Oh...wait, he's suspended now, too, my bad.
Andre87
Bench
Dude what are talking about?! Game six stats are the most important one - lakers were facing elimination first time since 00 series vs Portland, 27 fourth quarter fouls are just ridiculous - that was the worst & the most biased officiating I've ever seen! lakers have always got favorable officiating 'cause they were extremely popular in the world during that time and stern couldn't let them lose...
Gargamel
Starter
We were pissed when the refs gave the ball back to the Kings after Webber hit it out of bounds at the end of Gm5. 3-2 Lakers lead down the sink. See how those what-ifs go both ways?
Heuge
Starter
Questionable calls are different then giving a team a truck load of freethrows.
And we were pissed in game 4 when the refs counted a Samaki Walker 3 during half time, which would've made the Horry 3 impossible.
2>1.
Heuge
Starter
if the shoe fits....Wow. Some of you not only nurse a grudge, you actually feed and water it, give it designer clothes, nifty new shoes, and lots of bling.
Gargamel
Starter
And we were pissed in game 4 when the refs counted a Samaki Walker 3 during half time, which would've made the Horry 3 impossible.
2>1.
We were pissed when Shaq fouled out in Gm5 by putting 3 fingertips on Bibby for his 6th.
Let the infinite progression begin. Heh.
Gargamel
Starter
Well, LA got it back in 2004 and most of the same fans who felt Sac got cheated were changing up and saying that the Pistons were being more aggressive. +60 FTAs in a 5 gm series, biggest disparity since the early 70s. 111-41 advantage at one point.
An entire series worth of passive Laker offense led to that disparity. "Lakers Reloaded" did nothing but pass the ball around the perimeter and dump to Shaq, who the Pistons refused to double-team. The only exception to the Lakers passiveness was the fourth quarter of Game 2 when Kobe decided to dominate.
And, by the way, in the four games the Pistons won, they won by an average of 13 points. They were clearly more aggressive that entire series, and the Lakers did not adjust.
Compare that to one quarter of an elimination game when one team got called for 27 fouls in one quarter, and all three of their centers fouled out within three minutes. I don't think you can.
vladetomiller
Bench
Ah the aggressive team got the free throws.
I am not sure of the 27 fouls in 1 quarter theory, but assuming thats the case
Kings got called for 31 fouls for the whole game and the lakers were called for 24 for the whole game.
If your statement was true that the lakers got all the calls (27 calls) in the fourth quarter, I guess the kings played some flawless defense for the first three quarters to commit only 4 fouls for the first 3 quarters.
Scott Pollard and Vlade had 4 fouls a piece while entering the 4th quarter so fouling out doesnt necessarily mean picking up all 12 fouls in that quarter, another correction to your statement is not three centers but two, chris ended up guarding shaq for the rest of the game and though he committed a few fouls and should have fouled out as well, the refs kept him in the game and he was playing with 5 fouls for close to 5 minutes of the fourth quarter.
Interestingly, game 5 Vlade and Scott got 4 fouls together (3 vlade) and managed to get shaq to foul out of the game (Joe Crafford was the referee for that game )
It is like the secret that is whispered into another persons ear, the truth gets distorted after every such post little by little, and I am sure in another 5 years it will be stated as the lakers got all their points in free throws.
I have been stating all along that the lakers got the calls in game 6, make no doubt about that but I also will say that the kings got the calls in game 5 and the pistons got the calls in that series.
But you can revisit 27 fouls in the fourth quarter if you want
I am not sure of the 27 fouls in 1 quarter theory, but assuming thats the case
Kings got called for 31 fouls for the whole game and the lakers were called for 24 for the whole game.
If your statement was true that the lakers got all the calls (27 calls) in the fourth quarter, I guess the kings played some flawless defense for the first three quarters to commit only 4 fouls for the first 3 quarters.
Scott Pollard and Vlade had 4 fouls a piece while entering the 4th quarter so fouling out doesnt necessarily mean picking up all 12 fouls in that quarter, another correction to your statement is not three centers but two, chris ended up guarding shaq for the rest of the game and though he committed a few fouls and should have fouled out as well, the refs kept him in the game and he was playing with 5 fouls for close to 5 minutes of the fourth quarter.
Interestingly, game 5 Vlade and Scott got 4 fouls together (3 vlade) and managed to get shaq to foul out of the game (Joe Crafford was the referee for that game )
It is like the secret that is whispered into another persons ear, the truth gets distorted after every such post little by little, and I am sure in another 5 years it will be stated as the lakers got all their points in free throws.
I have been stating all along that the lakers got the calls in game 6, make no doubt about that but I also will say that the kings got the calls in game 5 and the pistons got the calls in that series.
But you can revisit 27 fouls in the fourth quarter if you want
No it's not.
I made the mistake of saying they got called for 27 fouls, when I meant that the Lakers shot 27 free throws. Either way, there was a huge disparity in the final quarter of an elimination game that was inconsistent with the way the rest of the series was called. A bigger disparity than even Game 5 that Laker fans such as yourself like to refer to as justification for the debacle that was Game 6. And, by the way, the 10 more free throws the Kings got in Game 5 is nothing compared to the 20 more the Lakers got in the fourth quarter alone of Game 6.
Those are the facts. Nothing distorted, handed down, twisted, embellished, exaggerated, etc. In fact, see for yourself. Here's the link to the box score and the play-by-play.
And as for the comparison to the Pistons/Lakers series two years later, there really isn't one to be made. The Pistons attacked, played physical and took the Lakers out of their game plan, and as a result, the Lakers couldn't make anything happen. Yes, there was a free throw disparity, but the big difference - and the point, really - is that there was a disparity in every game, including the game the Pistons lost. They shot more free throws in almost every quarter, because they were more aggressive in every quarter and they kept the Lakers from doing what they wanted to do offensively. Yet and still, they never had a 27 free throw quarter in that entire series, even with the disparity. And especially not in an elimination game.
Bottom line is that the pee-poor officiating in Game 6 of the 2002 WCF is the reason the Kings lost that game, and there's no way anyone who watched the game, much less the series, can honestly say otherwise. There's no comparison with the blown call in Game 5 that gave the Kings the ball late in the game; there's no comparison with the 2004 Finals; there no "the Kings choked in Game 7". Bottom line: the pee-poor officiating in Game 6, an elimination game, cost the Kings the game.
Any reasoning basketball fan that watched that game saw it and knows it, and I saw it with my own eyes. And there's no sorry and condescending 'game of telephone' line of so-called reasoning that's going to convince me otherwise, especially not from a Laker fan.
Last edited:
It finally dawned on me... I have no problem with any of this statement above. It's true. Game 6 was decided by poor officiating. The only time I get upset is when Kings fans change it to "The pee-poor officiating in Game 6 cost the Kings the series." I'll always remember the overtime of game 7. That's what cost us the series. Regardless of whatever had happened before, the Kings came back and played some of the best ball I'd seen in a long time in game 7. They just forgot to come out for the O/T...
I try to make sure that I always make that little exception, even though I think it's still accurate to say that the poor officiating cost them the series. If they won Game 6, there would have been no Game 7, so...
I mean, you're right about Game 7, and there's no way I will argue with you there, but there shouldn't have been a Game 7.
Heuge
Starter
We agree entirely.
I try to make sure that I always make that little exception, even though I think it's still accurate to say that the poor officiating cost them the series. If they won Game 6, there would have been no Game 7, so...
I mean, you're right about Game 7, and there's no way I will argue with you there, but there shouldn't have been a Game 7.
I try to make sure that I always make that little exception, even though I think it's still accurate to say that the poor officiating cost them the series. If they won Game 6, there would have been no Game 7, so...
I mean, you're right about Game 7, and there's no way I will argue with you there, but there shouldn't have been a Game 7.
But there was a game 7. Now if game 6 had eliminated the Kings, my rage would know no bounds. But it didn't. They had to go out on the court and keep focus on the now, and they did ... for 48 minutes. Unfortunately, the game lasted for 53.
So I shake my fists in anger at the fates, but I cannot blame the officials for the final outcome.
But that honestly doesn't make it hurt any less, which is why I've chosen to move on. If you cannot change the thing that hurts, you just have to move past it...
vladetomiller
Bench
thanks for the play by play very helpful
(10:47) [LAL 79-75] O'Neal Jump Shot: Made
(9:02) [LAL 82-79] Bryant Turnaround Jump: Made
(7:29) [LAL 86-81] Bryant Jump Shot: Made
(6:51) [LAL 88-83] O'Neal Jump Shot: Made
0:52) [LAL 101-98] O'Neal Reverse Layup: Made
Lakers made 5 shots in that last period and they outscored the kings 31-27 in that period (thanks for the box score
)If my math is right, that is 10 points they made of shots made and that would lead me to believe they had 21 points of free throws (NOT 27 - just because someone started saying it, it doesnt become the truth )
At the 7.37 mark there was a clear path foul on Jackson, I dont think you can argue about those 2 FTs on a clear path foul
Last 6 FTs were attempted by the lakers on intentional fouls in the last 20 secs of the game
If you take away those 8 FTs which clearly explain for themselves then you have 13 FTs that are left where you can contend about them and say that the lakers got some extra 13 FTs from the referees. Maybe if you watch the replay then you could provide some insight into whether those FTs are deserved or not.
You're thinking or 'treating' this like a coach would and not a realist...sure they had ANOTHER opportunity to win it...but the series was won in game 5 IMO. Both Game 4 and Game 6 were gifts to the Lakers that gave them extended life to even reach game 7 and get 'lucky' that the Kings forgot how to shoot FT's in overtime. Game 4 from Bob and Samaki's two 3 points to end the game and the other during halftime...then game 6 to the officials. So while they STILL could have won the series handicapped TWO games...they didn't because that's nearly insurmountable to come back from losing a 4 game swing like that in a series.But there was a game 7. Now if game 6 had eliminated the Kings, my rage would know no bounds. But it didn't. They had to go out on the court and keep focus on the now, and they did ... for 48 minutes. Unfortunately, the game lasted for 53.
So I shake my fists in anger at the fates, but I cannot blame the officials for the final outcome.
But that honestly doesn't make it hurt any less, which is why I've chosen to move on. If you cannot change the thing that hurts, you just have to move past it...
thanks for the play by play very helpful
(10:47) [LAL 79-75] O'Neal Jump Shot: Made
(9:02) [LAL 82-79] Bryant Turnaround Jump: Made
(7:29) [LAL 86-81] Bryant Jump Shot: Made
(6:51) [LAL 88-83] O'Neal Jump Shot: Made
0:52) [LAL 101-98] O'Neal Reverse Layup: Made
Lakers made 5 shots in that last period and they outscored the kings 31-27 in that period (thanks for the box score
If my math is right, that is 10 points they made of shots made and that would lead me to believe they had 21 points of free throws (NOT 27 - just because someone started saying it, it doesnt become the truth )
At the 7.37 mark there was a clear path foul on Jackson, I dont think you can argue about those 2 FTs on a clear path foul
Last 6 FTs were attempted by the lakers on intentional fouls in the last 20 secs of the game
If you take away those 8 FTs which clearly explain for themselves then you have 13 FTs that are left where you can contend about them and say that the lakers got some extra 13 FTs from the referees. Maybe if you watch the replay then you could provide some insight into whether those FTs are deserved or not.
All you have to do is look at the play by play and count the Laker free throws. There are 27 of them in the 4th quarter. I'm saying it because it is the truth, and it is the truth because it happened, not because someone started saying it.
And whether you want to make a case for the "reason" the Lakers shot 27 free throws in one quarter, which is more than the Kings shot that entire game, is irrelevant. The point is that they shot 27 free throws in the 4th quarter of an elimination game.
In fact, that's not even the point, to be honest. That is just a testament to the point. The point is that the officiating was horrendously Laker-biased that entire quarter, and the obvious bad calls that went against the Kings in that quarter cost them the win in an elimination game. It wouldn't matter that the Lakers shot 27 free throws in the 4th quarter if the calls weren't bad. But the calls were bad. And that's the point.
And, upon further examination of the stats in the 4th quarter, some of them that you just mentioned stand out like a sore thumb. For instance, the Lakers doubled their field goal points from the free throw line, which is pretty significant when you consider that free throws are only worth a point each. I mean, damn, they made four times as many free throws as field goals. Another observation is that the Kings made 10 field goals in the 4th, compared to just 5 for the Lakers. And what makes it so bad is that this one quarter was so uncharacteristic from the rest of the series. Out of 341 minutes played in that series, five years later, just 12 minutes stand out, infamously. In fact, the Lakers shot more free throws in that one quarter than they averaged in the rest of the series. By the way, I'm saying that because it's the truth, and it's the truth because it happened.
I get it, though. You are going to defend your team, even in the face of reason. But don't tell me that I'm being influenced by others perception of what happened, and that my recollection isn't based in reality. If you want to close your eyes to the travesty that was Game 6, that's fine, but it happened. The Kings got cheated out of an elimination game, and I'm saying that because it's the truth, and it's the truth because it happened.
Last edited:
Um, what? In all honesty, I think I'm treating this as someone who loves basketball but realizes IT'S A GAME! So, if anything, I'm taking the more realistic approach.
They DID come back. They took it to overtime in game 7, so apparently they weren't still thinking about what had gone on before. It's not about the 4-game swing. You yourself hit on the key point - the one thing that happened that sealed our doom - "the Kings forgot how to shoot FT's in overtime." Had that ONE thing not happened, we would have won in O/T and it would be the Laker fans forever rehashing the 2002 WCF.
bibbinator
Bench
27 free throws in one quarter means the Lakers were getting to the line about once per minute, on average. That's horrifying. If it were just some ordinary game it would probably make sportscenter for being so absurd.
VF21, I don't buy the "they should have won it in Game 7" argument.
The Kings went into game 7 with the knowledge that the officials were working against them. Even though they knew they would get different officials at game 7 and be at home that is still a heavy mental load to overcome. Players and teams psych each other out all the time, it's part of the game and players know how to deal with it. Officials are supposed to be impartial. It's like going to court and finding out the judge has taken contributions from your adversary. It gave the Lakers an unfair advantage.
The reason to complain about what happened is so it doesn't happen again. The NBA's most value property is the integrity of its game. Once the fans stop believing in it, it's over.
VF21, I don't buy the "they should have won it in Game 7" argument.
The Kings went into game 7 with the knowledge that the officials were working against them. Even though they knew they would get different officials at game 7 and be at home that is still a heavy mental load to overcome. Players and teams psych each other out all the time, it's part of the game and players know how to deal with it. Officials are supposed to be impartial. It's like going to court and finding out the judge has taken contributions from your adversary. It gave the Lakers an unfair advantage.
The reason to complain about what happened is so it doesn't happen again. The NBA's most value property is the integrity of its game. Once the fans stop believing in it, it's over.
uolj
Starter
The 27 is free throw attempts, not the number of free throws made. You're counting free throws made.
(11:34) [LAL 76-75] O'Neal Free Throw 1 of 2 (30 PTS)Superman said:
(11:34) [LAL 77-75] O'Neal Free Throw 2 of 2 (31 PTS)
(10:28) [LAL] George Free Throw 1 of 2 missed
(10:28) [LAL 80-75] George Free Throw 2 of 2 (1 PTS)
(8:29) [LAL 83-81] O'Neal Free Throw 1 of 2 (34 PTS)
(8:29) [LAL] O'Neal Free Throw 2 of 2 missed
(7:37) [LAL 84-81] Bryant Free Throw Flagrant 1 of 2 (23 PTS)
(6:21) [LAL] O'Neal Free Throw 1 of 2 missed
(6:21) [LAL 89-85] O'Neal Free Throw 2 of 2 (37 PTS)
(4:24) [LAL] O'Neal Free Throw 1 of 2 missed
(4:24) [LAL 90-90] O'Neal Free Throw 2 of 2 (38 PTS)
(2:56) [LAL 91-92] Horry Free Throw 1 of 2 (6 PTS)
(2:56) [LAL 92-92] Horry Free Throw 2 of 2 (7 PTS)
(2:17) [LAL] O'Neal Free Throw 1 of 2 missed
(1:55) [LAL 94-94] Bryant Free Throw 1 of 2 (26 PTS)
(1:55) [LAL 95-94] Bryant Free Throw 2 of 2 (27 PTS)
(1:37) [LAL 96-94] Fox Free Throw 1 of 2 (8 PTS)
(1:37) [LAL 97-94] Fox Free Throw 2 of 2 (9 PTS)
(1:15) [LAL 98-96] Fox Free Throw 1 of 2 (10 PTS)
(1:15) [LAL 99-96] Fox Free Throw 2 of 2 (11 PTS)
(0:19) [LAL 102-100] Bryant Free Throw 1 of 2 (28 PTS)
(0:19) [LAL 103-100] Bryant Free Throw 2 of 2 (29 PTS)
(0:11) [LAL 104-102] Bryant Free Throw 1 of 2 (30 PTS)
(0:11) [LAL 105-102] Bryant Free Throw 2 of 2 (31 PTS)
(0:02) [LAL] Horry Free Throw 1 of 2 missed
(0:02) [LAL 106-102] Horry Free Throw 2 of 2 (8 PTS)
Upon further review, there were only 26 Laker attempts in the 4th quarter. The reason for the discrepancy is bolded, and it is because the clear path foul only resulted in one free throw, and I thought it was two because the play by play says attempt 1 of 2. My fault. Unless the play by play is wrong and the second attempt was accidentally omitted; not entirely impossible.
However, the point still stands. And the Lakers still shot more free throws in that one quarter than they averaged the entire series (24.2). And the Kings still got robbed.
Last edited:
Did you NOT watch the game? Everyone acts as though game 7 was a blowout because the Kings were demoralized over the previous games. Nothing could be further from the truth.
This continual pointing of fingers at the officials completely ignores the bottom-line truth.
boxscore
The Kings got to overtime of game 7. Everything else at that point was moot. The advantage they had going into game 7 by playing AT ARCO cannot be overstated. I could practically hear the Arco Thunder up here, a good two hours away.
If you want to be angry at anything, be angry about the 53.3% FT shooting in game 7. Shooting 16 out of 30 from the stripe is inexcusable. Had they even made ONE MORE of those free shots, we wouldn't have lost. In fact, we wouldn't have even gone to overtime...
I admit to never looking at the box score after that day until now. I did make one error above. My memory told me we blew the FT's in overtime. In looking at the boxscore, we blew the FT's during the game. In overtime, they missed 8 jump shots and layups.
So, all in all, while you want to lay the blame solely at the feet of the officials, I cannot do so. Had the Kings shot 75% from the stripe and still lost, then maybe I'd be looking for someone else to blame. Had the Kings been able to step it up in overtime the way the Lakers did, I'd have to look for someone else to blame.
Truth be told, the Lakers brought their very best at the end and, coupled with their game 7 experience, they won the game.
I'm not going to look for people to blame because I honestly think doing so diminishes just how much our guys accomplished in that season and that series.
uolj
Starter
No it doesn't. If you want to look past game 6, fine. But that's just your method of looking at the series. I think somebody who wants to point to game 6 as the key is completely valid. Heck, if somebody wants to look at game 4 as the key to the Kings losing the series I'd buy that too. If they hadn't blown such a huge lead in game 4, they would have won the series. Just because they had a chance in game 7 doesn't mean that game 4 was not important.
Besides, most of the people who are lamenting the officiating in game 6 are acknowledging that the Kings still had a shot in game 7, not ignoring it. I don't know who is blaming the series loss solely on the officials, I think many are just saying that is the biggest and most glaring cause.
First, my comment was addressed to bibbinator, who does seem to be putting the loss at the feet of the officials:
Now, to rebut your "No, it doesn't" comment, I'll respond with "Yes, it does..."
I think some people just cannot accept that in the final analysis, even after they'd overcome the poor officiating, the Kings had the chance to right the wrongs, to beat the unbeatable foe... and they failed.
If some have to use the "We would have won but..." excuse, fine. The team that loses ALWAYS has some excuse.
We came very close to knocking off the dreaded Lakers despite the odds and despite the officiating.
And yes, you have to look past game 6. Why? Because it went 7 games. It's not "what if" - it's the cold hard facts. No matter what happened before, it was a one-game series the moment game 7 started. All the marbles were up for grabs.
"if..." this and "if..." that is moot after the game is in the books.
I know the players weren't thinking about game 6 or game 4 when they took the court in Arco for game 7.
And yes, perhaps it's a way of looking at things. But in a series that goes 7 games, it's ALWAYS about the outcome of that game. How the teams got there becomes irrelevant because nothing matters but the result of that ONE game.
bibbinator said:
Now, to rebut your "No, it doesn't" comment, I'll respond with "Yes, it does..."
I think some people just cannot accept that in the final analysis, even after they'd overcome the poor officiating, the Kings had the chance to right the wrongs, to beat the unbeatable foe... and they failed.
If some have to use the "We would have won but..." excuse, fine. The team that loses ALWAYS has some excuse.
We came very close to knocking off the dreaded Lakers despite the odds and despite the officiating.
And yes, you have to look past game 6. Why? Because it went 7 games. It's not "what if" - it's the cold hard facts. No matter what happened before, it was a one-game series the moment game 7 started. All the marbles were up for grabs.
"if..." this and "if..." that is moot after the game is in the books.
I know the players weren't thinking about game 6 or game 4 when they took the court in Arco for game 7.
And yes, perhaps it's a way of looking at things. But in a series that goes 7 games, it's ALWAYS about the outcome of that game. How the teams got there becomes irrelevant because nothing matters but the result of that ONE game.
Last edited:
uolj
Starter
I think people do accept the fact that the Kings still had a good chance to win even after game 6 (and game 4 for that matter). That doesn't diminish their effects on the overall outcome of the series.
Also, just because the Kings played in game 7 doesn't mean that it wasn't affected by game 6. The Lakers had the advantage of experience, the Kings had the advantage of the home court, but the Kings also might have been at a disadvantage due to the demoralizing events of game 6.
Bottom line is that it isn't always about the last game. The series is a series of 7 games. If something affects the outcome of one of those games, then it affects the outcome of the series. If something affects the outcome of a potentially deciding game, then it directly affects the outcome of the series.
For example, let's say the Clippers go up 3 games to 0 against the Bucks in the NBA finals. Then, in game 4 they lose a close game when a last second shot is ruled good for the Bucks even though replays show that it came after the game was over. In game 5, the entire Clipper team gets food poisoning from complimentary cheese they receive from their hotel and they lose to Milwaukee. In game 6, the Clippers are called for goaltending on a last second shot even though the ball was clearly on its way up, which gives the Bucks the victory and a 3-3 series tie. Then in game 7 the Clippers lose an evenly officiated game in overtime.
You're saying that games 4-6 are irrelevant because the Clippers had a chance in game 7. Most everybody else is saying that game 7 matters, but it should never have come down to it since the Clippers should have already won the championship.
Also, just because the Kings played in game 7 doesn't mean that it wasn't affected by game 6. The Lakers had the advantage of experience, the Kings had the advantage of the home court, but the Kings also might have been at a disadvantage due to the demoralizing events of game 6.
Bottom line is that it isn't always about the last game. The series is a series of 7 games. If something affects the outcome of one of those games, then it affects the outcome of the series. If something affects the outcome of a potentially deciding game, then it directly affects the outcome of the series.
For example, let's say the Clippers go up 3 games to 0 against the Bucks in the NBA finals. Then, in game 4 they lose a close game when a last second shot is ruled good for the Bucks even though replays show that it came after the game was over. In game 5, the entire Clipper team gets food poisoning from complimentary cheese they receive from their hotel and they lose to Milwaukee. In game 6, the Clippers are called for goaltending on a last second shot even though the ball was clearly on its way up, which gives the Bucks the victory and a 3-3 series tie. Then in game 7 the Clippers lose an evenly officiated game in overtime.
You're saying that games 4-6 are irrelevant because the Clippers had a chance in game 7. Most everybody else is saying that game 7 matters, but it should never have come down to it since the Clippers should have already won the championship.
I keep promising not to get drawn into this endless debate, and I keep breaking my promise to myself.
People will always have their own opinions about the game, about the series and about how we should view it.
We clearly disagree on what to me is the most critical point so I'll accept that.
Have a nice day, uolj.
People will always have their own opinions about the game, about the series and about how we should view it.
We clearly disagree on what to me is the most critical point so I'll accept that.
Have a nice day, uolj.
beb0p
Starter
I remember that play... there were at least two other Lakers in the area with Webber, and the official was standing right there. The TV camera did not have a good angle (I rewinded a few times) for any viewers to say for sure that the ball went off Webber's knee. The official may have blown that call, but they may not. There's no way any fan not seated in the front row in Webber's side of the court would know. But that's just one call, if anyone has to get down to the specifics, you can take 5 points off the Laker's score just by Shaq's lane violation on shooting his free-throws.
I do remember Game 5, because it was one of the few games where the calls were fairly even (by NBA standard of course).
Along with Game 4, Game 5 was also where the refs called Shaq early for throwing the elbows. It threw off Shaq's game, he was not aggressive and he fouled out. (In Game 4, frustrated with the tight officiating, Shaq threw up a Kareem-like sky hook that didn't hit the rim. It was the beginning of Shaq's passiveness until Game 6, when he got all the calls and then some).
If the series were called evenly, there wouldn't have been rule changes the following season; when every last-second-shot had to be reviewed and a reminder to the refs to call the lane vialotion on three throws.
- Status
