Screen caps showing why we won game fair and square

[Fireplug]

Been a while since I have posted here. Things must have changed since then. Had to re-sign up and everything.

I made some screen caps which show Posey gaining an unfair advantage on the inbounds play, and that we should have had 2.5 seconds on the clock anyway for the last play making the protest moot.

Thought you guys here might want to see them.

Cheers.

http://www.kingsfanclub.com/kings-beat-memphis-fair-and-square.htm

 

[iheartBrad]

i just love when people say cheers as a closing

 

[Andriod_KiNg]

agreed.. we should of gotten that timeout eariler.. we won , so i really dont care anymore

 

[iheartBrad]

yeah somebody mentioned JPs unfair advantage when guarding the inbound play...interesting...never really thought of that

but any you who i personally don't care even if we didn't win a game fair and square...lol...i mean we lost games to teams who haven't won fair and square...its our just due...IMO

case closed...game over...we get the W

 

[iheartBrad]

welcome back Fireplug...btw

hey Andriod--how are things over at realgm? is it worth logging in? that site is so slow on my computer for some reason...

 

[KP]

Someone please send this link to Koz and 1140 so they can quite talking about how we got away with one last night... good detective work Fireplug.

 

[bozzwell]

i just love when people say cheers as a closing

Me too. Could it be that we have more Brits on the forum then user infos would suggest?

 

[Andriod_KiNg]

welcome back Fireplug...btw

hey Andriod--how are things over at realgm? is it worth logging in? that site is so slow on my computer for some reason...

no body made a big deal about it.. people just talking about the amazing shot by Bibby.... overall that site is ok if you want to talk to non Kings fans..

 

[Twix]

Someone please send this link to Koz and 1140 so they can quite talking about how we got away with one last night... good detective work Fireplug.

Koz always favor the refs...LOL.

 

[KP]

Koz always favor the refs...LOL.

I know but on this one he's not favoring them cause he basically was saying the refs got it wrong. I'm not saying Koz is always automatically against the Kings, He's way to much of a homer for me to say that. But those guys on KHTK love to play Devils advocate, all of them. Oh well.

 

[Fillmoe]

WE WON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! who cares if the refs messed up atleast we were on the winning side. memphis fans will get over it, we had to get over it 2 times with the suns and mavs. **** happens move on.

 

[G_M]

I know but on this one he's not favoring them cause he basically was saying the refs got it wrong. I'm not saying Koz is always automatically against the Kings, He's way to much of a homer for me to say that. But those guys on KHTK love to play Devils advocate, all of them. Oh well.

The pictures don't really have anything to do with he nmain issue.

Not that it matters at this point, but the issue is the deflection of the ball. The clock should have been started when Posey deflected the ball not when Bibby touched it.

Maybe there still would have been enough time for Bibby to get the shot off. It's hard to say with certainty.

 

[Fireplug]

The pictures don't really have anything to do with he nmain issue.

The pictures have EVERYTHING to do with the main issue. The issue is NOT whether the ball was tipped. The issue is that the refs don't always start and stop the clock exactly when it properly should be started and stopped. If you try to argue that the refs missed the tipped ball and the clock should have started at that point then you have to equally argue that on the previous play the refs missed the timeout call and the clock should have stopped earlier. You can't have it one way without the other.

The only other alternatve, and the correct one, is that the NBA game is officiated by humans, always has been, always will be, and that humans can't robotically start and stop time perfectly so everyone must just agree to play the game the way it ends up being called, and hopefully over time everything will even out.

 

[uolj]

The pictures have EVERYTHING to do with the main issue. The issue is NOT whether the ball was tipped. The issue is that the refs don't always start and stop the clock exactly when it properly should be started and stopped. If you try to argue that the refs missed the tipped ball and the clock should have started at that point then you have to equally argue that on the previous play the refs missed the timeout call and the clock should have stopped earlier. You can't have it one way without the other.

Yes, you can.

As was discussed with the Kings losses on bad calls, especially in the Mavericks game, you can argue a last second miss call without going back to previous plays before it. Why? Because eventually you will keep going further and further back until you have argued over every debatable call or non-call made in the game, which leads you back to just accepting all calls as being made by fallible humans. That's a good way to go in general, but when a single call affects the outcome of the game blatantly, it is perfectly acceptable to discuss that call and that call only.

Now, if you're saying - "I don't feel bad that the Kings won after a missed call because the refs missed the call before" or "I don't feel bad that the Kings won after a missed call considering the calls that cost them games a few weeks ago" (my favorite), that's fine with me, but that doesn't mean that the game was won "fair and square".

 

[zeke04]

can anyone on the court call a time out? For some reason I thought the guy with the ball had to.

 

[Fireplug]

Well sure it is OK to discuss it. It's cool to discuss anything. But for you to say that the final call was somehow more important than the call right before it, even when the call right before it would have made the final call moot, just doesn't make much sense to me.

Sure it was fair and square. Mistakes were made against both teams and the last two timing mistakes cancelled each other out.

No you can't have it one way without the other. As you rightly state, it makes no sense to go back and look at every call during the game -- which is the ONLY fair way one could look at the last play as being more important than the previous ones. Are refs supposed to be allowed to be fallible during the normal course of a game but Supermen during the last few seconds of a game with X-ray vision, to see through players screening a foul and quartz timepieces surgically embedded in their heads?

As we both agree, much better to save money on the antacids and just realize that the refs are human and mistakes will be made at all times of the game, and roll with it.

 

[Fireplug]

The NBA rulebook just states that the ball must be in possession of the offense for a player on the offense to call timeout. For that matter, I would be really surprised to hear that Adelman didn't pre-warn the refs, as coaches normally do in those situations, that they would be calling timeout if they got the rebound.

 

[VF21]

Nice to see you here, Fireplug! You know you're always welcome around here.

All I really care about in this instance is that, for once, the basketball gods smiled down on the Kings instead of frowning at them and dropping heavy objects upon their heads, etc.

I think you made a very good point:

the NBA game is officiated by humans, always has been, always will be, and that humans can't robotically start and stop time perfectly so everyone must just agree to play the game the way it ends up being called, and hopefully over time everything will even out.

There's been a lot of focus on the officials recently and some very valid concerns but, at least, to me last night's "controversy" was a tempest in a teapot. If a game was reviewed in its entirety, I'm sure there would be several instances where the clock didn't stop or start at precisely the proper nano-second. As you say, we just have to hope that things like that even out.

Stay safe, Plug!

 

[uolj]

In this particular instance, going back to when the timeout was called is probably ok. It is closer to the Derek Fisher shot where Spurs fans complained that it took more than 0.4 seconds, when the clock didn't stop immediately on the play before. I can buy that. In general, you don't "have to" argue about preceding calls, but in this case I guess it is relevant if the Grizzlies are complaining.

Of course, I still prefer the "we got screwed three times in five games so you got no business complaining" argument.

 

[SacTownKid]

In this particular instance, going back to when the timeout was called is probably ok. It is closer to the Derek Fisher shot where Spurs fans complained that it took more than 0.4 seconds, when the clock didn't stop immediately on the play before. I can buy that. In general, you don't "have to" argue about preceding calls, but in this case I guess it is relevant if the Grizzlies are complaining.

Of course, I still prefer the "we got screwed three times in five games so you got no business complaining" argument.

If you can catch and shoot in 0.4 seconds I would guess that if the clock started late, like it always does do to human error, than he would have got the shot off anyways.

 

[Rowdyone]

If, in the opinion of the league, the clock is being manipulated by "homers" the the refs can (heaven forbid) be the official time keepers and use a stopwatch like they do in the NFL...of course, they have replay challenges there and they are often overturned so maybe keeping time interferes with good judgement and we should just keep the system we have now!! Rules are needed to protect the integrity of the game but too many rules enforcers tend to clog it up and the it degenerates into lawyers, vagueries and how far do you want to go back?