Hoops

James Harden dunk vs Spurs

"It's not a bad call made by the refs though. It's a scorebench error. There is no argument the ball went in but the scorebench didn't pick it up."


The scorebench goes off the refs calls. Haven't you ever noticed the refs turn to the bench to signal a made shot before? And put up three fingers for a 3?

How can it be a scorebench error?

Scorebench don't determine if a score counts, the refs do.

When there is a score, the opposition player needs to pass the ball in from behind the baseline, you can't just rebound it and run with it. They don't wait for the score bench before they pass it in.

Here is another howler missed call

NBA 2019: LeBron James travel video vs Utah Jazz, Lakers | scores
https://www.news.com.au/sport/sports-life/lebron-james-gets-away-with-audacious-travel-in-lakers-win/news-story/2d101c2822c790653b41c43c511ee1a3

Bad call on Bogut cost us a certain medal. What’s done is done.

It doesn't need to reflect that because it wasn't called a score.

Bad calls happen. Bad calls affect the score. We don't go back and retrospectively deal with every bad call ever made.

I watched the last 10 minutes of the game.
Without doubt IMO Harden and Westbrook straight out gave up. So many possessions that they weren't even trying.
I know NBA games are really glorified pick up games, but thats no excuse for a lack of effort especially when you're being paid what you are.

Glad they lost in the end because they simply didn't deserve to win.

The points should have counted and Houston should be given the victory.

Yeah Isaac Perthworlds comments about male referees menstral cycles in another thread are exactly what the forum needs to drive standards.

A no call is still a call; you can't just weight the value of bad calls on the final score to dictate who wins. If the score had counted, we can't say what would have happened in the last 7-8 minutes of the game (or the overtimes should they have occurred).

Bad calls happen, fix it so that something like that can be reviewed for sake of sanity, and move on.

Extremely unlucky, and i'd be pretty salty to lose after having 2 points not counted, but going back and changing a result based on an incorrect decision by the refs just opens up a whole new can of worms

Perthworld and D2.0.
Oh my how the forum standards have diminished.

Can't understand the NBA not insisting on a replay, in fact, a best-of-3 decider, all on prime time.

After the NBA/China debacle putting $4Billion in jeopardy, the NBA could probably do with the financial bonanza of replaying that game several times.

May even outdo the Lamelo viewership!

I get that, but that shows how common sense hasn't/can't be used because of technicalities.

And the whole "you can't ask for an official review because you didn't do it within 30 seconds while we were trying to figure out what happened" thing is laughable.

Mistake made, game won/lost, result is in the books, move on...

Or, give the Boomers a rematch against Spain LOL!!

It's not a situation the rules allow the replay center to review, though. Probably because nobody considered that it's the sort of thing that would ever need to be reviewed.

Yeah its crazy that they can just change the call on a 2/3 point shot from the replay centre and just move on, or change whether someone beat the buzzer etc, but can't just go back and add the two points on what was a clear made shot. Its a lack of common sense.

Having said that, giving Houston the win or replaying the last 7:50 would be dumb. It was a bad call, but thats part of basketball.

The only person that was right was harden. The refs stuffed up because where did they think the ball could possibly go if someone is throwing it down.
Could be the people that tied the net up were at fault or the length of it because that should just not happen it was as clean a dunk as you will see

Yay for understanding!

They decked out a state of the art instant replay centre in Secaucus and it's going to waste. In other sports the TMO and even the much maligned VAR can intervene when something way less egregious than this is missed.

Also this wasn't a subjective call like a block/charge interpretation - the ball actually physically went in the hoop. The officials aren't being undermined. A positive from all of this is you would think they will alter their review policies to be less rigid.

Perthworld, it’s not reviewable you moron

What's the point of having every feed routed through Secaucus if something like this doesn't get picked up?

When a player people don't like gets screwed and more people find it funny than fume, we shall forever call this the James Harden Rule.

Was that the worst 50 point game of all time? 4-20 from 3, 11-38 overall, and 24 FTM. Jeezus, gross.

This is possibly even more ridiculous than that time the Wildcats lost when they might have won instead had things gone differently at an earlier stage.
Once they let that get to the end of the game there's really no acceptable way they can make up for it. A dunk shot so nice it almost went in twice. The only positive is that it happened to Harden.

Can't believe the Spurs won. Gave up watching the game when they were thoroughly getting pumped.

From Twitter:

A Rockets source is optimistic that the NBA office will take action regarding James Harden's dunk that didn't count, either awarding the win to Houston or ordering that the final 7:50 be replayed because the Rockets outscored the Spurs in regulation.

Rockets already talking protest

Maybe like tennis you could have a challenge system, not on fouls but outs and obviously on wether the ball goes in. One call a half, you get call right you keep it, wrong and see you later. Baskets scored behind or in front charge line would be interesting as well.

Showing refereeing is a tough job and you can't always get it right.

Showing refereeing is a tough job and you can’t always get it right.

Have been thinking about this for a little bit: could basketball change from timed to simply first to 100?

I like tennis because regardless of what's happened before, to win, you have to win the last point - why couldn't a similar concept work here, with the team that wins required to score the last (ie 100th) point?

Games could still be timed, with 10/12 min quarters etc, and if no team has reached 100 by the end of 4 quarters, you keep playing OTs.

Advantages:
- Spectators/fans know exactly what they're getting. No dour (in the NBL) 72-68 defensefests. Instead, it's a 100-96 defensefest!

- Teams play harder to get to the 100 quicker

- Strategy becomes interesting. Do you pull the starters when your team is ahead 92-78? When you reach 97, do you instantly start going for 3s to try and seal it?

Disadvantages:
- Makes distributing playing time potentially a bit trickier

- Good offensive teams will reach 100 well before the end of 4 (or even 3) quarters - this may not represent good value for money for spectators etc

- I'm sure there's other wrinkles I haven't thought of that other forum-goers will alert me to.