NBA admits missing foul on Kevin Durant last night!

[FakeInjury]

David Stern ADMITS something! His refs missed a foul on the last second 3 point shot attempted by Kevin Durant last night against the Jazz. I think this is like an addict's first step. 1st phase was denial(Donoghy), 2nd phase acceptance(Change of Rules concerning replays), 3rd phase admitting guilt.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Sweet vindication for OKC. Well except for the fact that they still go home with the L and tied for the 6 seed instead of a game up.

 

[Double-K]

David Stern ADMITS something! His refs missed a foul on the last second 3 point shot attempted by Kevin Durant last night against the Jazz. I think this is like an addict's first step. 1st phase was denial(Donoghy), 2nd phase acceptance(Change of Rules concerning replays), 3rd phase admitting guilt.

Next phase should be finding ways to fix the problem... so... it was a final second attempt, why didn't the refs review it?

 

[Bricklayer]

Next phase should be finding ways to fix the problem... so... it was a final second attempt, why didn't the refs review it?

Next step would be calling the NBA on B.S. superstar protection here -- where was the foul? What, because Durant kicked him? That kikcing your defender B.S. has been B.S. ever since it started being called in the NBA to benefit Reggie Miller. Yeah there might have been a foul -- on Durant. Watch Miles' left arm -- he actually keeps it pinned to his own side specifically to avoid committing a foul. That's not a foul. Not in midgame, and certainly not at the end of the game. It may be to the NBA's wuss brigade, and it may be to protect a superstar, but that's called bleeping man up. I detest that call being made. And I incredibly detest the NBA making a point that it should be. Kevin must be smiling somewhere.

http://www.nba.com/video/channels/nba_tv/2010/04/07/20100407_durant_3.nba/

 

[cstorm]

I would never in a million years expect that to be called a foul. Even if it was a benefit to the Kings.

 

[Kings Faithful]

Yeah, I don't think of this in a positive light at all. If the NBA is going to go back and beg Durants forgiveness on this specific missed call, why not go back and ask forgiveness for every obvious missed call? Or is it just because Durant is a super mega star and Stern doesn't want to make him mad. This is just more of the same superstar treatment from the NBA, nothing about Stern has changed, except for maybe his methods of giving superstar treatment. Kevin Martin was fouled everytime he had the ball in the last few seconds of the games and not once can I remember him actually getting the call. I'm not saying he is justified because Kevin should realize that refs don't EVER call that type of a foul, Unlless your the Lakers of course.

 

[Double-K]

Next step would be calling the NBA on B.S. superstar protection here -- where was the foul? What, because Durant kicked him? That kikcing your defender B.S. has been B.S. ever since it started being called in the NBA to benefit Reggie Miller. Yeah there might have been a foul -- on Durant. Watch Miles' left arm -- he actually keeps it pinned to his own side specifically to avoid committing a foul. That's not a foul. Not in midgame, and certainly not at the end of the game. It may be to the NBA's wuss brigade, and it may be to protect a superstar, but that's called bleeping man up. I detest that call being made. And I incredibly detest the NBA making a point that it should be. Kevin must be smiling somewhere.

http://www.nba.com/video/channels/nba_tv/2010/04/07/20100407_durant_3.nba/

Whoa you're right! I only saw it a little on ESPN before this. Thanks for the link to the video. And yes you're right, it was the right call. Durant did the "Reggie Miller" on Miles.

NBA still remain one of the less fair judged sport out there. Superstar = NBA.... Sad...

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I thought in the replays last night I saw Durant's arm get whacked after the ball was out of his hands. Usually that is called. Here all I saw was body contact initiated by Durant but this video was stuttery in worthless on my computer.

 

[Double-K]

I thought in the replays last night I saw Durant's arm get whacked after the ball was out of his hands. Usually that is called. Here all I saw was body contact initiated by Durant but this video was stuttery in worthless on my computer.

Miles blocked the ball and his forearm touched Durant, and Durant pulled the Reggie Miller on Miles. Either way, what's done is done and should've been left unchanged. It's stupid for David Stern to even comment on it. Especially when he didn't comment on almost all of the foul related events.

 

[Superman]

I thought it was a foul when I saw it last night. Have not looked at any of the videos on line, but the contact with Durant's hand looked like enough to get a foul called at any point in the game. It seemed to me like it was Bulls/Celtics again (Rondo slapping Miller in the face and no flagrant being called), with the refs not wanting to make a call that would decide the game.

 

[captain bill]

I was watching the game live, and at the time it was unclear whether it was a block, a foul, or a partial block with the foul. I figured the refs wouldn't call it because (1) they bailed out Durant a play earlier on a drive to the basket that was much less of a foul and (2) because borderline calls at the end of the games don't get called - so not much of a problem with this.

On the replay, it looks much more like a foul, but without the opposite angle you can't tell whether he got the ball first or not (looks like no - all forearm).

As for the kick, I don't think Durant made contact and it looks like it was a reaction to getting thrown off-balance by the forearm slap (Durant can't weigh more than 160 pounds so I imagine it's easy to push his body around).

As for the Stern admission, this isn't anything new. The league regularly apologizes for non-calls like this but never does anything about it. Play the game over and the refs still dont call it at the end.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

My other question on last night was that normally a guy will get a call after he has released the ball if he is whacked hard on the follow through, what happens if the ball clears the hand before the buzzer but the whack happens after?

 

[LWP777]

Next step would be calling the NBA on B.S. superstar protection here -- where was the foul? What, because Durant kicked him? That kikcing your defender B.S. has been B.S. ever since it started being called in the NBA to benefit Reggie Miller. Yeah there might have been a foul -- on Durant. Watch Miles' left arm -- he actually keeps it pinned to his own side specifically to avoid committing a foul. That's not a foul. Not in midgame, and certainly not at the end of the game. It may be to the NBA's wuss brigade, and it may be to protect a superstar, but that's called bleeping man up. I detest that call being made. And I incredibly detest the NBA making a point that it should be. Kevin must be smiling somewhere.

http://www.nba.com/video/channels/nba_tv/2010/04/07/20100407_durant_3.nba/

Are you serious? He hit Durant's forearm while he was in the act of shooting. That's an automatic foul. Did you notice that the ball came up 5 feet short? So you are saying because it's the end of the game then no fouls should ever be called? By NOT making the call, they decided the game and that is why the NBA came out today and admitted they missed it.

 

[Bricklayer]

Are you serious? He hit Durant's forearm while he was in the act of shooting. That's an automatic foul. Did you notice that the ball came up 5 feet short? So you are saying because it's the end of the game then no fouls should ever be called? By NOT making the call, they decided the game and that is why the NBA came out today and admitted they missed it.

You know what? I am going to reverse myself on this after seeing this replay:
[yt=]goXD0Q553LE[/yt]

On the initial angle it does not look like a foul, leaving the flail kick as the only basis to make the call. But at the 1:36 mark of the above video they have a nice closeup from a different angle, and would have to agree he got the forearm.

And as an aside -- yes, at the end of the game any and all remote doubts about a foul, all judgements should error 100% on the side of no foul. Its like a death penalty case -- the absolute 100% worst outcome is to have the state (the NBA) wrongly decide to terminate somebody, or worngly decide to give a game to a team that didn't deserve it. If you miss a few fouls along the way, that's fine. That's still decided between the players. Having the refs steal a game by calling a phantom foul would permanently and irrevocably shred whatever is left of the perception of the league's objectivity. Each and every event would be proof of a conspiracy of some sort. You have to be 100% sure. Here on the slowmo reverse angle replay I say that yep, I was wrong, it does look like a foul. I also say, no bigee that the refs missed it -- biggee to the teams and unfortaunte, but obviously very easy to miss at full speed.

 

[mac]

I don't even see the kick at all. Watch the nba.com link, pause at about 12 seconds. Durant's legs are straight down, ball has been released already

Edit: Unless you mean the kick after the shot. I thought what Reggie used to do was kick while he was actually shooting so that a defender would automatically 'foul' him just by being near, not after the shot to act as if he had been fouled.

 

[Bricklayer]

I don't even see the kick at all. Watch the nba.com link, pause at about 12 seconds. Durant's legs are straight down, ball has been released already

Edit: Unless you mean the kick after the shot. I thought what Reggie used to do was kick while he was actually shooting so that a defender would automatically 'foul' him just by being near, not after the shot to act as if he had been fouled.

that's not the point of the kick -- you don't do it while shooting, that would mess up your shot. You do it after the ball is away to attempt to cheat. No other word for it. No different han calling a ball out in tennis that landed inside the lines. Just cheating. The kick is an attempt to draw the refs eye and fake contact that wasn't there. If that had been it it was complete B.S.. But upon that other view of the replay I'm converted to the forearm contact theory.

 

[LWP777]

You know what? I am going to reverse myself on this after seeing this replay:
[yt=]goXD0Q553LE[/yt]

On the initial angle it does not look like a foul, leaving the flail kick as the only basis to make the call. But at the 1:36 mark of the above video they have a nice closeup from a different angle, and would have to agree he got the forearm.

And as an aside -- yes, at the end of the game any and all remote doubts about a foul, all judgements should error 100% on the side of no foul. Its like a death penalty case -- the absolute 100% worst outcome is to have the state (the NBA) wrongly decide to terminate somebody, or worngly decide to give a game to a team that didn't deserve it. If you miss a few fouls along the way, that's fine. That's still decided between the players. Having the refs steal a game by calling a phantom foul would permanently and irrevocably shred whatever is left of the perception of the league's objectivity. Each and every event would be proof of a conspiracy of some sort. You have to be 100% sure. Here on the slowmo reverse angle replay I say that yep, I was wrong, it does look like a foul. I also say, no bigee that the refs missed it -- biggee to the teams and unfortaunte, but obviously very easy to miss at full speed.

That was a great replay there. I appreciate you reversing your original take on this play!

 

[LWP777]

that's nto the point of the kick -- you don't do it while shooting, that would mess up your shot. You do it after the bal is away to attempt to cheat. No other word for it. No different han calling a ball out in tennis that landed inside the lines. Just cheating. The kick is an attempt to draw the refs eye and fake contact that wasn't there. If that had been it it was compelte B.S.. But upon that other view of the replay I'm converted to the forearm contact theory.

They are calling the kick differently now. I've seen it called an offensive foul on many occasions.

 

[Dave McNulla]

they did the same thing in 2008 playoffs when derek fisher fouled brent barry on a 3pt shot, spurs could have tied the game on free-throws but lost on the no-call. nba said it was a mistake but the spurs were still down 3-1 in the series. i'm not saying the spurs would have won in OT, but they didn't have the chance.

so what's the honesty good for? a loss is a loss.

 

[swisshh]

The call was made according to "unwritten rules" which have no accountability and thus allow for manipulation.

 

[LWP777]

The call was made according to "unwritten rules" which have no accountability and thus allow for manipulation.

Maybe, but like Bricky said earlier, in real time it wasn't an easy call to make. It was tough to tell whether it was a block or a foul at the time. We've seen a few replays and have debated whether it was a foul or not even after seeing it in slow motion. I'm not defending the official but he was in a tough spot. He probably wanted to be 100% sure because he knew by calling a foul OKC would have won the game (Durant would make at least 2-3 FT's).

This is the kind of stuff that is bound to happen if you're an official. They aren't perfect and this won't be the last time something like this happens.

 

[Smills91]

David Stern ADMITS something! His refs missed a foul on the last second 3 point shot attempted by Kevin Durant last night against the Jazz. I think this is like an addict's first step. 1st phase was denial(Donoghy), 2nd phase acceptance(Change of Rules concerning replays), 3rd phase admitting guilt.

Where the hell is the admission from Kobe shooting a 3 out of bounds??? 3 video angles confirmed it.

 

[Insomniacal Fan]

If they can't enforce fouls reliably at the end of games, they should acknowledge it with a rules change. "In the last minute of regulation with a margin of 10 points or less, only flagrant fouls will be called"

 

[FakeInjury]

If they can't enforce fouls reliably at the end of games, they should acknowledge it with a rules change. "In the last minute of regulation with a margin of 10 points or less, only flagrant fouls will be called"

LOL, ya, but then the players abuse that rule and shove or hack. It should be common knowledge by now that the refs don't like looking like idiots, and 90% of the time they achieve this by not calling fouls at the end of games, except when LA is at risk of not being in the NBA finals. I haven't heard Stern once utter the name Mike Bibby along with the word "elbow". Like i said somewhere on this forum before.... Sacramento deserves reparations, the NBA took like 5 first round picks away from Minnesota, who says they can't award 1st round picks?? It wouldn't be fair, it wouldn't look good, but it would be just. I think the closest thing to reparations the NBA gave sacramento is a 500Million $ line of CREDIT and a WNBA championship, THANKS.

 

[FakeInjury]

I wish Tim Donaghy was on NBATV or TNT or ESPN on a regular basis, just to point this kind of stuff out. It would be a segment in which he would have expertise. He could review plays in all sports, and the refs who made the off call. 30minute program, the replay, and the NAME OF THE REF who fudged it. Refs would IMMEDIATELY have an vested interest in NOT being on the program.

 

[LWP777]

Where the hell is the admission from Kobe shooting a 3 out of bounds??? 3 video angles confirmed it.

Huh? Didn't even PW say that he was inbounds? He had the best look in the house.

 

[Bricklayer]

If they can't enforce fouls reliably at the end of games, they should acknowledge it with a rules change. "In the last minute of regulation with a margin of 10 points or less, only flagrant fouls will be called"

Its one of those things so universally understood it effectively is a rule, but would be hard to quanitify. There's no "no accountability" to it after awhile. Its like everybody exceeding the speed limit on the freeways. Technically the police can pull you over going 65 in a 55, but since almsot every single car is speeding along at that speed, if they (the police) do, it jumps out at you as a why me? Similar here -- if the refs call a foul in this situation it actually draws more attention than if they don't, because everyone knows they really don't want to unless its blatant. Which is good actually. Too many touch and bump and flop fouls are called as it is. Having the refs calling them to win or lose games routinely would be a disaster.

 

[Peja]

Why didn't they just see the replay after the game and correct their own mistake right there?

 

[Packt]

My opinion is that unless you're being tackled it's not a foul in this type of situation. Make shots and never rely on getting a call, that's my stance. Expect that there will be contact and adjust for it. That's what clutch is.

That play was not a foul. He missed the shot. Who's mad? Don't let it get to that point.

 

[Superman]

My opinion is that unless you're being tackled it's not a foul in this type of situation. Make shots and never rely on getting a call, that's my stance. Expect that there will be contact and adjust for it. That's what clutch is.

That play was not a foul. He missed the shot. Who's mad? Don't let it get to that point.

The contact clearly affected the shot, as it didn't even make it halfway to the basket. The defender didn't touch the ball. It was a foul, plain and simple. Not a flagrant, for all the world to see, foul, but a foul, nonetheless. And the right call would have been to call the foul, since it happened.

I understand the desire to keep the refs from making a call that decides the game, but if the defender commits a foul, that's just that, and it's not the refs deciding the game, it's the man who committed the foul. Utah and their fans would have been upset, but it was clearly a foul.