Hoops

Perth v Melb Oct 27th

"But, to be fair, these things are much harder to judge in real time. The NBL review clearly explained all the factors- and yes, I admit it's not easy to get the perfect view and then weigh all of those factors in a split second."

Wow, that's about the most sensible thing anyone has written in this thread.

It was a somewhat weird scenario, in that you needed to see the baseline ("lateral"?) view to see that it was wrong. Norton did establish a defensive position, but he wasn't facing Ware, so not in fact a Defensive Position, prior to him moving.

Human error has been a part of sports since humans were involved. Suck it up. I like the nbl's initiative in explaining these calls and hopefully behind the scenes they are also trying to improve referee standards.

Thanks anon- exactly the odds you'd expect

LV I do have stats. Live betting at the time had MEL at $1.01-$1.10 range to win so that equates to 90%-99%.

So the league confirms Perth benefit ted from a bad call? Wow... baby steps to less home cooking.

Where are all those Perth posters who claimed it wasn't a block? Oh that's right this is the only time we won't be hearing from them.

The average three point percentage is something like 34%, and that includes all the wide open ones where a double team leads to an open player

In scenarios where a team is down by 3 with under 5 seconds to go with a sideline possession, the percentage is much lower. I'd be very, very surprised if it's over 20%.

I'd be interested if anyone has any stats on this.

Yeah, and plenty of those 13 would've been wide open, when the opponent was defending the drive and left the perimeter open.

I get the impression you haven't watched as much basketball as you make out

3/13 is already higher than 20%.

They've got plenty of good 3 point shooters.

But the chance of nailing a 3 under pressure - when the other team is a very strong defensive team and knows you're trying to hit a 3- and needing to do it within 4 seconds, is not over 20%.

Especially not when they were 3 from 13 from outside for the game.

‘Scoring three points within four seconds’

Those points are worth more though, right?

That would be a plausible argument if they had no inbound plays designed to get a three, and/or no good three-point shooters.

90% is conservative.


No way Adelaide is a greater than 10% chance of scoring 3 points within 4 seconds (at the conclusion of a scrappy, very low scoring game) and then winning in OT.

You keep repeating that 90% number like it means anything.

The call in Melbourne's favour guaranteed them a win when they were at least 90% certain of winning anyway.

Agree the backcourt violation was more obvious. Can't believe everyone missed it.

The call in Melbourne's favour guaranteed them a win when they were at least 90% certain of winning anyway.

Agree the backcourt violation was more obvious. Can't believe everyone missed it.

By comparable I mean you can compare them because they were both bad calls. The thing that's not comparable is the call in Melbourne's favour was more obviously incorrect and guaranteed Melbourne a win. The call against Melbourne still left them with a 50:50 chance to win.

In other words Paul, that's a funny definition of "comparable" that you're using.

(After being robbed all game).

Adelaide was robbed- I agree.

They were robbed of a 10% chance of winning.

United was robbed of a 90%+ chance of winning and instead thrust into a 50/50 OT scenario.

But you notice now LV, and you’re trying to downplay because it was your team that got the rub, unlike last Saturday where you have invented a scenario where 2 points is worth more to Ware because he sat down at the start of the second half two nights later.

Definitely comparable, except the Melbourne cross-court one was worse and robbed Adelaide of any chance of winning.

To be honest I didn't notice

But if you watch the replay, no one noticed. Not Joey Wright, not the commentators, and not the Adelaide players. Daniel Johnson half heartedly pointed at Ware- but didn't then say anything to the refs

We'd all have to agree on 4 things

1. The missed call was wrong

2. This is one of the most bizarre events On a basketball court. Wrong missed call at the death but no one realised

3. Unlikely Adelaide would've scored a 3 with 4 seconds to go- if they'd got the ball like they should've. Possible, but maybe a 20% chance at best. Then OT even if they hit. So Adelaide would've had at most a 10% chance of winning if the correct call was made.

4. Not really comparable to Casper in Perth where, if the correct call had been made, all other things being equal, there would be a 90% chance United wins (Conservatively). With Casper on the line with 1.4secs left and shooting one FT for a 3 point lead. Perth could've had the ball in the back court, 2 down, 1.4 secs left. Or if they had a time out remaining, would've been 3 down with an inbounds in their own half with 1.4 secs left.

No brain explosions necessary- I was pretty pissed on the night

The review just confirms what absolutely anybody with the faintest clue about basketball already knew- the replays unequivocally confirmed that it should've been a blocking foul

But, to be fair, these things are much harder to judge in real time. The NBL review clearly explained all the factors- and yes, I admit it's not easy to get the perfect view and then weigh all of those factors in a split second.

"And for all that, it IS still just one call. Had either team got another call their way, the game wouldn't have gone into overtime"

Yeah the only thing I don't like about these review articles is they focus on just a handful of calls over the entire round. It's good to see the NBL owning up to mistakes and (I'm assuming) looking to improve the standard of reffing. But the fact is there are a huge number of incorrect calls/non calls that impact games which the article doesn't touch on.

Charge on Ware was officially an incorrect call according to the NBL referee review:
LINK

(Several other calls also analysed on that page)

If you say so.

The article and quote do though, "oh look chipped tooth must be a charge"

Still a block.

“I copped an elbow and when I wiped my mouth, there was a bit of my tooth there. It was in pieces,” Norton said.
“Once I got it all out of there and the blood was gone, I was able to focus back on the game.
“It’s chipped downwards which is strange but it’s a small price to pay to get the win.

I don't think the NBL favours Perth, or any team really. Overall NBL refs are just quite inconsistent in the way games are called which makes it seem certain teams are favored more in some games.

Home cooking is probably something that happens to some degree. I'd imagine a home crowd of 13,000 in Perth would have a bit more influence over the refs in a 50/50 call compared to say 3000 in Illawara.

Perth are also on the end of some really bad/missed calls, even at home, but just because so many opposition fans are too one eyed and despise Perth they don't seem to admit to it. There's been games were people complain about Perth 'getting favored' all game despite Perth getting a bunch of wrong calls against them.

Overall I think the refs are just inconsistent in the way all games are called, and fan bias leads people to focus on some teams calls more than others.

"Homocides opinion on calls is like asking one of his other commentators for financial advise."

Nice.

Cheers Paul.

"M. Aylen?"

He is known to read online forums and get upset to his colleagues about negative things said about him.

Whether it was a "simple play" or not the bottom line is that the call made was indisputably wrong.

"And when does the referee in real time get to watch the play on a monitor from 5 different cameras in slow mo and get the opportunity to change their call? They don't. Homocides opinion on calls is like asking one of his other commentators for financial advise. Bottom line is It’s not a simple play. And for someone of your pedigree Paul to be throwing out comments such as it’s a horrendous call just makes you look like you have a grudge. It’s not until the baseline vision is shown that the call starts to be questioned. But you keep slinging from the cheap seats pony boy."

M. Aylen?

Thanks for the name calling.

I'm not really of pedigree, but I have been fortunate to see a lot of high-level basketball around the world close up, and what is noticeable is the charge/block is called by the rules, putting onus on defenders to establish position.

This means players have to actually move their feet and hold their ground, or if beaten open their stance rather than lunging sideways in front of the ball carrier.

For whatever reason, in this country we just have never been able to call it like most of the rest of the basketball, instead regularly rewarding defenders who lunge backwards upon contact. Funnily enough, you don't see nearly as much of that in other comps around the world because you don't get the call.

Vaughan Mayberry's call today on Johnson when Wesley simply took a dive highlights the issue we have. Our experienced refs were developed with an incorrect approach to charge/block, now they're passing that onto the young refs coming through.

Overall the way games are being called at the moment is allowing for attractive basketball, but the charge/block and blocked shot situations are significant areas of weakness and have been for a long time.

Clearly flogging a dead horse here. Now at no point did i say i don't have the capacity to feed myself and adjust to the time, i did, went to brunch for those playing at home. Will likely eat at home next week. There is a heap of new places around Yagan square that i would like to try, they aren't really an option at this game time, and for myself and i am sure others that don't frequent the city often, we are in the city for games and it does detract from the whole experience in my opinion. Can't understand why so many people can't acknowledge a simple fact without carrying on about all the less than desirable alternatives available, i guess none of you ever get disappointed and are always happy when you don't get your way. Good on you all!

"Correct Defensive Position can be established instantaneously, not withstanding that the player is in effect moving. All you need is to face your opponent and have both feet touching the floor."

You need to establish a legal defensive position adjacent to the offensive player before he leaves the ground. Watch the replay, Norton at no stage had his feet on the floor with legal adjacent position. He jumped sideways in front of Ware after he had left the ground.

Now if you want to quote Homicide Williams, he said "Let me take me that back, that's a block" after he watched the replay. Even by Australian standards, where charge/block has traditionally been called in favour of the defence, that was a block.

The early start time didn't give me enough time to find something pink to wear.

Shame to see more red than pink yesterday.

So is everything in Perth for the lack of quality you get.

For real tho the stadium food is massively overpriced

Oh noes I can't eat at noon or go to home opens.

A laughable complaint with brunch being a big fad nowadays. Oh boo hoo hoo I need to eat at exactly midday.

J, you started this by saying that a lot of places only open at 11, which makes it tight to have a meal/drink then get seated in time for tip-off. I could list a dozen places within 5/10 minutes walk of the arena that could get you a decent feed and a few rounds and still have plenty of time to get to the game.

If that time is too tight for you, maybe have lunch after the game and make an arvo of it.

This is just like those “stadium food is shit” threads. No one is forcing you to eat at the arena, or only before the game, and if you cant work out other arrangements or solutions then perhaps you’re not quite adult enough to leave the house.

Nothing wrong with making a day of it, J. I do that too. But IMO there are a heap of great eating options around Perth & Northbridge that are open before 11am on the weekend.
But if you absolutely must have a chicken parmy or pork buns at 10:30am and anything else is a truly horrible proposition then that still feels kinda precious to me.
I don't see why Perth Arena should benefit the local economy of pubs in the area but not cafes, for example.

Luuuc it may be a "precious" attitude but it's also a prevailing attitude of sports teams and local businesses trying to integrate the game experience with a night/day out and frankly its better for the local economy if it does. East vic parks strip of restaurants always have meal deals and transport for every optus stadium event. For some people when you're out you like to make a day of it, the time genuinely makes that difficult, its not an ideal situation and that should be acknowledged without people reverting to "make a sandwich" let's not take my original comment out of context.

Well said. If you go through the middle of the guy's chest it's a charge for mine.

Can you move in while the player is in the air though? That is the q i would be asking if i am ware and what you said is accurate.

Luuuc considering all the work the team had done to build the game night experience and integrate it with the city it is a kick in the teeth. Critisicm is important, businesses are not after just survival but long term growth and sustained success. I and im sure many of the thousands attending games enjoyed been able to grab a bite, drink etc before or after, the time makes that more Awkward, its fact, and people should be allowed to make they point without getting shut down and labelled as whingers Abbey bloody time.