The Horford play seemed like a million plays this year. Every game has guys jumping up yelling at the shooter. The worst one was Smart. Morris was fully on the court. Just ridiculous.
It was as if only one team could be called for offensive fouls. The non call on Butler late was especially bad.Yeah, a 26-18 foul disparity simply doesn't match the game played on the floor.
The disparate treatment of offensive fouls was egregious.
I get it's very hard to officiate, but the Celtics had to overcome a bad couple officiating games. And they did.
You forgot the part about the three pointer being shot from out of bounds. Because that heel was down.So in game where the Celtics win by three and Heat 3 pointer was taken off the board by the refs, the narrative that the Celtics got screwed persists?
I agree with you.What I dont' get is how NBA hasn't gotten these type of calls fixed:
View: https://twitter.com/_JasonLT/status/1531102239527272452
What's controversial about a shot not counting because it was taken from out of bounds? Shots are reviewed and either taken off the board or changed from a 2 to a 3 or vice versa all the time.Noi i specifically mention it. Just wondering how it fits with the idea the Celtics got screwed and the NBA, ESPN, everyone else wanted the Heat to win. Was that not a controversial, unuals good call to favor the Cs?
After the last few games, it is hard to believe that any member of the Heat roster was not on the court at all times.What's controversial about a shot not counting because it was taken from out of bounds? Shots are reviewed and either taken off the board or changed from a 2 to a 3 or vice versa all the time.
Absolutely. I used to think I had a better sense of that. Jaylen Brown used to be a master of avoiding charges by changing direction. Now it seems like everything is a charge - I would love to see some stats on offensive fouls in this series.Someone mentioned this in the game thread but I no longer have any idea what a charge is and what a block is. Maybe the NBA needs to expand the restricted area because I'd personally rather see players drive a d score the ball than guys take a charge (plus it seems super dangerous).
I also agree with Van Gundy that if a player is trying to avoid contact, the defender shouldn't be able to move and take a charge.
Block vs. charge calls are hard enough in slow motion, let alone real time, and I think that’s part of what makes them feel almost arbitrary. I think it’s an interesting idea to expand the restricted area, but my worry is it biases things even more in favor of the offensive player and I think we already see guys like Giannis get away with murder in terms of barreling into guys to initiate contact and getting calls. Take away the ability to get the occasional charge call and you may as well pencil him in for 20 FTA per game. I can’t immediately think of a corresponding rule change to also allow for defense to be played near the rim, and I wouldn’t trust refs just generally allowing a bit more contact because there’s no way that’s done on a consistent basis.Someone mentioned this in the game thread but I no longer have any idea what a charge is and what a block is. Maybe the NBA needs to expand the restricted area because I'd personally rather see players drive a d score the ball than guys take a charge (plus it seems super dangerous).
I also agree with Van Gundy that if a player is trying to avoid contact, the defender shouldn't be able to move and take a charge.
I’m tired of watching Kyle Lowry, period, between his dirty plays and flopping.One thing I would love to see is the NBA coming down hard on clear and obvious flops where the player then gets up looking for a call. I’m not talking even stuff like Tucker getting a light push and falling down like he was shot. I’m talking about stuff like Lowry a couple games ago snapping his head back on a phantom elbow where he was literally never touched - no shades of gray, no trying to guess how hard the contact was since few of us have any idea just what it’s like to get hit even lightly by an NBA player, just a no questions about it flop. Allow that stuff to be reviewed on video and assess technicals at the beginning of the next quarter, max allowable fine under the CBA, suspensions after a certain number. It probably only helps at the margin, but those types of things drive me crazy (even when Marcus does it).
Even JVG seemed to tire a little of it by the end of the series which tells you all you need to know. I can’t stand Lowry, but at the same time his bullshit works, and I’m sure it’s the same for any Boston opponent with Smart.I’m tired of watching Kyle Lowry, period, between his dirty plays and flopping.
But there is apparently a mandate that the media needs to characterize his bullshit as ‘gamesmanship’ and ‘veteran savvy.’
You are confusing the chicken and the egg here. The problem is that the way they are calling these has changed for the worse, and that creates the confusion. So it is an indictment of rule-making and officiating that this has occurred---not a defense of it. On block-charge a major part of the problem is officials have bought into the grifting of guys like Lowry and Smart, who are rewarded for acting and flopping. That's not a 'game' problem that's an officiating problem. I am of the view the NBA should adopt the standard used elsewhere---whoever initiates the contact should get the foul. Guessing at whether feet are set before or after a player leaves the ground is, at game speed, unrealistic as you note. And they should enforce techinicals and fines for obvious flopping, which they could but do not.This may be the primary reason why playoff game threads are insufferable. You have 40 people admitting they don’t know what is or isn’t a charge, even after slo-mo replay, only to berate the officiating for making a call AT GAME SPEED on what they admittedly don’t know from their couch on replay.
My struggle is with screens especially at game speed. I feel the officials do a pretty good job on block/charges at game speed and I have a much better read on these……but screens, I’m literally guessing at game speed and sometimes replay doesn’t even help me.
I don’t think there is an easy answer. We saw how horrific “banning the flop” worked in college this season. Repeatedly, we’d see obvious charges not only not called but the defender being warned for flopping……after taking the shoulder of a 220 lb penetrate firmly into his chest. The officials still have to differentiate what is or isn’t a flop just as they have to determine what is or isn’t a block/charge……giving them another decision to make at game speed is a terrible idea.Like the poster upthread I am puzzled at why flopping remains in the game. Everyone knows who does it a lot and I understand they have to negotiate fines in the CBA, but like...just figure it out? It's horrible to watch no matter who is doing it, and the players who flop and are actually good like Smart will still be good players.
And yeah, I thought the series had been officiated OK, but the last two games were very inconsistent. You have to call things the same way, either tight or not, through the whole game and they didn't.
So use replay. Have someone in the press box watching every play and issue a tech or suspension for plays where someone flopped with no or little actual contact. Just as a start.I don’t think there is an easy answer. We saw how horrific “banning the flop” worked in college this season. Repeatedly, we’d see obvious charges not only not called but the defender being warned for flopping……after taking the shoulder of a 220 lb penetrate firmly into his chest. The officials still have to differentiate what is or isn’t a flop just as they have to determine what is or isn’t a block/charge……giving them another decision to make at game speed is a terrible idea.
You also have the issue we saw in the Bucks series where the officials essentially told Ime if bodies weren’t hitting the floor then there would be no offensive foul calls. I literally can’t remember a charge call where the defender didn’t end up on his back (leaving aside how feasible it is given the amount of force coming from the offensive player).I don’t think there is an easy answer. We saw how horrific “banning the flop” worked in college this season. Repeatedly, we’d see obvious charges not only not called but the defender being warned for flopping……after taking the shoulder of a 220 lb penetrate firmly into his chest. The officials still have to differentiate what is or isn’t a flop just as they have to determine what is or isn’t a block/charge……giving them another decision to make at game speed is a terrible idea.
I think you're mistaking posters being exasperated over the inconsistency of actual defensive/offensive foul calls for people admitting they are ignorant about them. People who comment they don't know what a charge is - which has included me at least once - are doing so with tongue firmly planted in cheek.This may be the primary reason why playoff game threads are insufferable. You have 40 people admitting they don’t know what is or isn’t a charge, even after slo-mo replay, only to berate the officiating for making a call AT GAME SPEED on what they admittedly don’t know from their couch on replay.
My struggle is with screens especially at game speed. I feel the officials do a pretty good job on block/charges at game speed and I have a much better read on these……but screens, I’m literally guessing at game speed and sometimes replay doesn’t even help me.
Good post. To the quoted part: asking refs to assess who has initiated the contact seems nearly as subjective and hard-to-assess in real time as guessing at whether the defender's feet were set, though. I wonder if there's a different kind of criterion that would be much easier to judge objectively. For example, any use of arm for clear-out is a charge; any significant contact that does not involve clear-out is a block. A change like this would alter the spirit of the rule and the style of play, but it seems less severe than extending the protected area or getting rid of the charge altogether.I am of the view the NBA should adopt the standard used elsewhere---whoever initiates the contact should get the foul. Guessing at whether feet are set before or after a player leaves the ground is, at game speed, unrealistic as you note
I think any anti-flopping crusade would have to rely on suspicious plays being reviewed after the fact, with the league handing out one-game suspensions for flopping. This would result in a bunch of guys getting suspensions, probably some undeservedly... but the net effect would be that guys would stop trying to sell charges and would probably go in the other direction of trying to remain stoic. Your're right that it would be too much for refs to litigate in real-time.I don’t think there is an easy answer. We saw how horrific “banning the flop” worked in college this season. Repeatedly, we’d see obvious charges not only not called but the defender being warned for flopping……after taking the shoulder of a 220 lb penetrate firmly into his chest. The officials still have to differentiate what is or isn’t a flop just as they have to determine what is or isn’t a block/charge……giving them another decision to make at game speed is a terrible idea.
The problem with flopping is that - and this is true in both soccer and basketball - a lot of time, if the "foulee" doesn't do something exaggerated, the refs don't call the foul. I mean how many times do you see guys grab another guy's arm on rebounds. None of them are called, except when Smart throws his head and arms around and falls to the floor. Same thing with contact to the head - refs apparently look for the guy's head snapping back, so everyone snaps their head back. (Derrick White does this a lot but he apparently never seems to get a call, probably because he doesn't exaggerate the effect enough.)Like the poster upthread I am puzzled at why flopping remains in the game. Everyone knows who does it a lot and I understand they have to negotiate fines in the CBA, but like...just figure it out? It's horrible to watch no matter who is doing it, and the players who flop and are actually good like Smart will still be good players.
And yeah, I thought the series had been officiated OK, but the last two games were very inconsistent. You have to call things the same way, either tight or not, through the whole game and they didn't.
Yeah, that’s pretty insane to bitch about two calls like that when you never once had the lead in the game. The better team won and it’s pure homerism to claim otherwise.I was browsing r/Heat last night, and I found it interesting that many fans are calling themselves the 2002 Kings. They specifically point to the overturned Strus 3 and the post-rim graze Grant Williams basket after which they claim should not have been allowed. After seeing alternate angles / freeze frames, the overturned Strus 3 is making more sense to me now. I have to admit that I haven't had a chance to review the tape on the Grant Williams basket to know if it should have been a side out instead.
Anyways, I just wanted to point out that everyone hates the refs after that series.
To my eye, it seemed like if Lowry or Butler went to the basket it was a foul almost all of the time (definitely in the 1st half, the 2nd half they didn’t give Butler as many calls) whereas the Celtics had a much lower percentage on those types of plays.The Strus call was odd in timing---while it has happened before, taking points off after the fact would feel bad to me as a Heat fan for sure. I do believe the replays support the call---but the timing is rough.
There's no credible case on the Grant basket that the ball didn't touch the rim---you can very clearly and visibly see the rim vibrating after the ball hit it. The more realistic complaint there (which the announcers made) is that often there's a whistle and stoppage even on a missed 24 second violation, not a 'play on' That's a more viable complaint than the shot itself.
There is never a game where all the calls are correct. My push on this is always to ensure people don't stop at "both teams have things to question" and instead to ask "was the impact of the missed calls equal?" because that's what really matters. Refereeing is hard---there will be misses. WHehter they are equal, and equally impfactul, is a better discussion (to the degree someone cares, which I realize some do not).
I thought game six second half was about the least balanced bad officiating we've seen in a numberof years. Game 7 was better; the second quarter was pretty unbalanced favoring the heat and the rest of the game was relatively balanced---lots of tough calls, but some each way. Overall the Celtics were the bigger team and more aggressive offensively and had 50% fewer fouls called in their favor---that is far more impactful than either of the calls the Heat cited. The charge-block stuff was egregiously inequitable. Lowry, in particularly contributed to how that was called and so to me, hard to argue the Heat got a bad whistle the last two game---which it is pretty clear the announcers agreed wtih.
There's a difference between exaggerating contact, and whipping your head back and flailing your arms when there's no contact at all. Or grabbing the other guy's arm and acting like he grabbed you.The problem with flopping is that - and this is true in both soccer and basketball - a lot of time, if the "foulee" doesn't do something exaggerated, the refs don't call the foul. I mean how many times do you see guys grab another guy's arm on rebounds. None of them are called, except when Smart throws his head and arms around and falls to the floor. Same thing with contact to the head - refs apparently look for the guy's head snapping back, so everyone snaps their head back. (Derrick White does this a lot but he apparently never seems to get a call, probably because he doesn't exaggerate the effect enough.)
Only difference these days appears to be who is better at doing it but YMMV.There's a difference between exaggerating contact, and whipping your head back and flailing your arms when there's no contact at all. Or grabbing the other guy's arm and acting like he grabbed you.
The current Heat are not a hateable team in general, but I'll be glad to have no more Kyle Lowry. Hopefully his career wraps up soon and I can be glad to have no more Kyle Lowry, forever.To my eye, it seemed like if Lowry or Butler went to the basket it was a foul almost all of the time (definitely in the 1st half, the 2nd half they didn’t give Butler as many calls) whereas the Celtics had a much lower percentage on those types of plays.
And the refs fell for clear Lowry flops way way too often. I think there were 3 or 4 called and they were obviously flops in real time.
In real time, it's easy to miss because a ref can't see a play from every angle. After the game is over, it's easy to fine and suspend players when a good camera angle shows an elbow missed a face by several inches.Only difference these days appears to be who is better at doing it but YMMV.
Yeah JVG was pretty consistent at calling out Lowry's embellishing.Even JVG seemed to tire a little of it by the end of the series which tells you all you need to know. I can’t stand Lowry, but at the same time his bullshit works, and I’m sure it’s the same for any Boston opponent with Smart.
I will say this again. The game is reffed the way the players, Coaches, and league decide. Until at least two of the three agree to punish the stage acting it will persist. No other player calls out floppers, no opposing coach goes off on Lowry. This tells me they accept it, or maybe like it.I’m tired of watching Kyle Lowry, period, between his dirty plays and flopping.
But there is apparently a mandate that the media needs to characterize his bullshit as ‘gamesmanship’ and ‘veteran savvy.’
I don’t recall saying anything about the NBA, I made a Scott Foster joke after a particularly bad call. Before they gave Bam a mulligan for clubbing White in the head.Noi i specifically mention it. Just wondering how it fits with the idea the Celtics got screwed and the NBA, ESPN, everyone else wanted the Heat to win. Was that not a controversial, unuals good call to favor the Cs?
That seemed like a normal shooting motion. Just generally, calling an offensive foul for something a player does with his arm, not his elbow, with his hand fully on the ball, in the act of shooting, on a made shot.....seems...dubious. I’m not sure I’ve ever seen that before.i don’t even think the elbow part matters.I’m usually fine with the bang bang plays. Officials usually have more context, watching the play develop live. Where my TV becomes jeopardize is when you get calls like the one against Brown for making a layup. You shouldn’t be able to defend with your face to get an offensive foul call.
damn that crome dome headband, it hid his 3" gashI don’t recall saying anything about the NBA, I made a Scott Foster joke after a particularly bad call. Before they gave Bam a mulligan for clubbing White in the head.