Did it hit the rim?

[Batz]

Crucial sequence is the 4th with about one minute remaining. Ray Allen takes a wideopen three, apears to completely brick it and it appeared to be a 24 second violation. Referees reviewed it and on three angles, it looked like it didn't hit the rim. In one angle it did.

But one thing is also crucial, you could see that when Perkins grabbed the rebound, Lakers tried to foul him but the Celtics called a timeout so the referees could review it only to give the Celtics the ball.


So did it hit the rim? I couldn't tell honestly but that was a big call...

[CelticBaller]

I don't think so though it looked like the rim moved so....

[oh the horror]

It totally hit the rim. Left side, slight rim, and backboard. I dont even know why this is a debate for everyone.

[Jailblazers7]

It totally hit the rim. Left side, slight rim, and backboard. I dont even know why this is a debate for everyone.

It looked like it on the one angle but its debatable. It shoulda been reviewable regardless.

[MK2V1GP]

SERIOUSLY!?!?!?!

haha, this shouldn't even be an afterthought or question, let alone have its own thread. IT CLEARLY HIT THE RIM. Only an extreme laker homer who's blind in one eye and half blind in the other would say it didn't hit the rim lolololol.

[pethuel03]

The better question would be - How the f*ck did fisher outjumped garnett?

[kurple]

The ball changed direction two times:

First time when it hit the rim
Second time when it hit the backboard

[DwightHowardMVP]

It want even close. All the views and you still cant see the ball touching the rim.

And the trajectory of the ball never changed so obviously it didn't hit anything.

If they're going to review some plays and not all. They need to get rid of replay

[MK2V1GP]

It looked like it on the one angle but its debatable. It shoulda been reviewable regardless.


They did review it if I'm not mistaken. And it only took a couple of seconds for them to look at it.

It was OBVIOUS it hit the rim. Please delete thread, thanks.

[Batz]

It totally hit the rim. Left side, slight rim, and backboard. I dont even know why this is a debate for everyone.
Because on 3 angles it looked like it didn't and one angle it looked like it clearly did. If the Lakers were given the ball then it would've increased their chances. It was a crucial call, just asking what everyone's opinion is and then wait for someone to post evidence.

[CasterL]

yeah it hit the rim

[MayCeltics]

I think it did. Lakers did get a stop afterwards, but still failed to capitalize.

[tpols]

The better question would be - How the f*ck did fisher outjumped garnett?
more heart son

[Force]

absolutely hit the rim...the dumb commentators were saying it was hard to see in slo mo..duh,,a play like that you watch in regular speed so you can see the ball clearly change angles...no question it hit the rim

[Jailblazers7]

They did review it if I'm not mistaken. And it only took a couple of seconds for them to look at it.

It was OBVIOUS it hit the rim. Please delete thread, thanks.

I thought it wasn't a reviewable play by the rules. They dicussed it but werent able to see the slow mo replays from different angles.

[boozehound]

it clearly did. you can see the trajectory of the ball change as a consequence.

[04mzwach]

This is bad. You must have the smallest TV in the world or a fuzzy screen. Maybe you watch streams on the net? Well, it was clear that the ball hit the rim. VERY CLEAR after the replay.

[boozehound]

It want even close. All the views and you still cant see the ball touching the rim.

And the trajectory of the ball never changed so obviously it didn't hit anything.

If they're going to review some plays and not all. They need to get rid of replay
how about you understand the rules of the game? Unless its a possession out of bounds situation (i.e. not a shotclock violation), there is no such thing as review.

[boozehound]

This is bad. You must have the smallest TV in the world or a fuzzy screen. Maybe you watch streams on the net? Well, it was clear that the ball hit the rim. VERY CLEAR after the replay.
yeah, I thought it was clear in game play with the angle from the otherside of the court. both replays show a trajectory change no question.

[t-rex]

I saw the replay and DVR'd it. You can't tell. If it were the NFL it would have been inconclusive and the call on the field would have stood.



Clearly though, such calls should be reviewable.

[DwightHowardMVP]

how about you understand the rules of the game? Unless its a possession out of bounds situation (i.e. not a shotclock violation), there is no such thing as review.
:rolleyes:

Thats exactly what i mean. If there only going to review out of bounds plays then might as well get rid of all of it.

The whole replay system is flawed

[DwightHowardMVP]

I saw the replay and DVR'd it. You can't tell. If it were the NFL it would have been inconclusive and the call on the field would have stood.



Clearly though, such calls should be reviewable.

Yeah thats what i find funny. How people saying it was clear as day that it hit the rim.


Original call was La ball should have never changed it

[boozehound]

:rolleyes:

Thats exactly what i mean. If there only going to review out of bounds plays then might as well get rid of all of it.

The whole replay system is flawed
sure, but then why only the last 2 minutes. plays that could be overturned during the other 46 mins have just as much impact and cant be reviewed.

[Harison]

If you doubt, rewatch replay from the front, in HD and slow-mo, ball obviously grazed the rim. Its silly refs cant review such situations, but surprisingly they made a right call, even broken clock is right twice per day :oldlol:

[boozehound]

Yeah thats what i find funny. How people saying it was clear as day that it hit the rim.


Original call was La ball should have never changed it
personally I thought it was pretty clear that it hit the rim during the live broadcast

[DwightHowardMVP]

sure, but then why only the last 2 minutes. plays that could be overturned during the other 46 mins have just as much impact and cant be reviewed.
Yeah. Exactly. ANd if someone gets fouled and they see it in the replay they cant call it. So might as well just save replay for game winners

[Orlando Magic]

I saw the replay and DVR'd it. You can't tell. If it were the NFL it would have been inconclusive and the call on the field would have stood.



Clearly though, such calls should be reviewable.

Agreed. There is no 100% way to tell, it wasn't clear, and if it were the NFL the call would have stood due to it being inconclusive. Good post.

I do believe though that it did NOT hit the rim. I never saw the ball change trajectory till it hit the backboard and I didn't see the net move one bit. If it did indeed hit the rim, it grazed it so lightly that it's like putting your finger on a wall or desk with as little amount of your finger actually touching said wall or desk. Just BARELY grazing.

[jstern]

Judging by the player's reaction, I assumed it hit the rim. The replay confirmed it.

I'm on this thread to see how many are in denial that it hit it.

[04mzwach]

Agreed. There is no 100% way to tell, it wasn't clear, and if it were the NFL the call would have stood due to it being inconclusive. Good post.

I do believe though that it did NOT hit the rim. I never saw the ball change trajectory till it hit the backboard and I didn't see the net move one bit. If it did indeed hit the rim, it grazed it so lightly that it's like putting your finger on a wall or desk with as little amount of your finger actually touching said wall or desk. Just BARELY grazing.

Did you not see the multiple angles? :lol

[derman]

NO it did NOT hit the rim

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OF4dRipXg7I

The rim didnt shook one little bit, the net didnt shook one little bit, the ball didnt change any direction before it hit the backboard

All who say that it hit the rim are liars

[asd]

NO it did NOT hit the rim

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OF4dRipXg7I

The rim didnt shook one little bit, the net didnt shook one little bit, the ball didnt change any direction before it hit the backboard

All who say that it hit the rim are liars

your argument is that the rim didn't "shook" one bit

and the video that you present as evidence constantly shakes from start to finish

:oldlol:

[OldSchoolBBall]

The second replay angle they showed (from straight on) made it clear that the ball DID hit the rim. The other two views they showed weren't conclusive. My friends all said "it hit the rim!" as soon as the shot clock went off in real time, so we all thought it hit w/o looking at the replay. The second angle (which they only showed once imo, but it was the clearest angle) is the one you should look at. Hopefully that entire sequence will be on youtube soon.

[jstern]

NO it did NOT hit the rim

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OF4dRipXg7I

The rim didnt shook one little bit, the net didnt shook one little bit, the ball didnt change any direction before it hit the backboard

All who say that it hit the rim are liars
Fascinating that you think that way. It so clearly hit it even on that youtube video. If you can't see the slight change of direction, then look at the spin of the ball and how it completely changed before bouncing off the backboard.

[mattevans11]

The better question would be - How the f*ck did fisher outjumped garnett?

if you really want to break it down, its because the ball was still on its way up.....

[Batz]

Fascinating that you think that way. It so clearly hit it even on that youtube video. If you can't see the slight change of direction, then look at the spin of the ball and how it completely changed before bouncing off the backboard.
Good point but it's VERY HARD to tell. Alot has to do with the crappy quality but you can't tell on the spin because it went near the rim and immediately hit the backboard. On that angle though it seems it didn't touch the rim at all.

[KG215]

The better question would be - How the f*ck did fisher outjumped garnett?

This

[derman]

your argument is that the rim didn't "shook" one bit

and the video that you present as evidence constantly shakes from start to finish

:oldlol:


No it doesnt constantly shakes from start to finish. The last 5 sec the video doesnt shake.
The ball went OVER the rim. Stop the video at 8 sec and you will see.
the ball doesnt change direction one little bit until it hits the backboard. So clearly it did not hit anything but air before. It was an airball.

HOMECOOKING.

[ginobli2311]

trust me....it hit the rim. i have it in hd on my 81" screen and i'm looking at it right now change angles.....it hit the rim.....100% for sure

[MK2V1GP]

NO it did NOT hit the rim

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OF4dRipXg7I

The rim didnt shook one little bit, the net didnt shook one little bit, the ball didnt change any direction before it hit the backboard

All who say that it hit the rim are liars

Wow. You actually are stupid enough to post a video where it CLEARLY shows it hitting the rim, then claim it didn't touch it at all?

ISH is full of idiots.

[nosurrender]

Good point but it's VERY HARD to tell. Alot has to do with the crappy quality but you can't tell on the spin because it went near the rim and immediately hit the backboard. On that angle though it seems it didn't touch the rim at all.

just......... stop

[Batz]

just......... stop
I said it didn't look like it hit the rim on that angle, mainly because of the crappy quality. u mad cuz...?

[derman]

Wow. You actually are stupid enough to post a video where it CLEARLY shows it hitting the rim, then claim it didn't touch it at all?

ISH is full of idiots.

When it hits the rim? Say the second in the video.

[IN-PAX-WE-TRUST]

Nope... bad call but I don't think it changed the outcome. Boston outplayed the Lakers.

[RazorBaLade]

the point is the refs guessed. u cant even 100% say what happened in slo mo, so if they guessed in our favor n c's lost, u guys would be mad too.

[nosurrender]

When it hits the rim? Say the second in the video.

between the 13th and 14th seconds it changes direction twice. figure that out

[RazorBaLade]

trust me....it hit the rim. i have it in hd on my 81" screen and i'm looking at it right now change angles.....it hit the rim.....100% for sure

having an 81" screen doesnt mean u saw it better

[Batz]

between the 13th and 14th seconds it changes direction twice. figure that out
horrible angle...

[nosurrender]

the point is the refs guessed. u cant even 100% say what happened in slo mo, so if they guessed in our favor n c's lost, u guys would be mad too.

let me put it this way. if you were the ref, who is supposedly to be completely unbiased, what would u do?

[nosurrender]

horrible angle...

quite clearly, you do not know the physics behind a ball htiting the rim

[nosurrender]

having an 81" screen doesnt mean u saw it better

yes it does, physically it amplifies the trajectory change

[jstern]

People, look at the spin of the ball, look at it change rotation and speed up. Further more look at the reaction of the players. I don't even think one Laker complained. When you play basketball and a ball hits the rim like that, you know.

[derman]

between the 13th and 14th seconds it changes direction twice. figure that out

It changes only once. when it hits the backboard. 12-14 sec in the video tells you that the ball did not hit the rim before it hit the backboard, and sec 7-9 tells you that the ball did not hit the rim after it hit the backboard.
sec 7-9 also shows only one change of direction, when it hits the backboard

HOMECOOKING.

[Batz]

quite clearly, you do not know the physics behind a ball htiting the rim
And what's this like your profession or something...? :lol :lol

[nosurrender]

And what's this like your profession or something...? :lol :lol

i did get A in my physics and mechanics classes at a prestigious university

[DuMa]

the rotation of the ball changed.

[Batz]

i did get A in my physics and mechanics classes at a prestigious university
And you aced that ball hitting the rim part eh? :roll:

[chazzy]

Just saw the youtube replay, I'm 99% sure it hit the rim

[Batz]

Just saw the youtube replay, I'm 99% sure it hit the rim
Atleast post it... :hammerhead:

[nosurrender]

And you aced that ball hitting the rim part eh? :roll:

why bother arguing w/ a person who never even took physics 101, sigh...

[derman]

the rotation of the ball changed.

Ofcourse it changed after it hit the backboard. Sec 7-9 in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OF4dRipXg7I show that after the ball hits the backboard it goes straight to Perkins. So it doesnt hit the rim after it hits the backboard.

And sec 12-14 show that the ball did not hit the rim before it hit the backboard. Everything is clear.

I saw it live that the shot was an airball.

Homecooking. Stern wants 7 games.

[nosurrender]

Ofcourse it changed after it hit the backboard. Sec 7-9 in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OF4dRipXg7I show that after the ball hits the backboard it goes straight to Perkins. So it doesnt hit the rim after it hits the backboard.

And sec 12-14 show that the ball did not hit the rim before it hit the backboard. Everything is clear.

I saw it live that the shot was an airball.

Homecooking. Stern wants 7 games.

rotation changes twice, please, please see that

[DwightHowardMVP]

trust me....it hit the rim. i have it in hd on my 81" screen and i'm looking at it right now change angles.....it hit the rim.....100% for sure
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

[Batz]

why bother arguing w/ a person who never even took physics 101, sigh...
:rolleyes:

[ginobli2311]

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

?????????

are you saying it did not hit the rim?

[DwightHowardMVP]

why bother arguing w/ a person who never even took physics 101, sigh...
When you have to resort to some bullsh!t physics formula that means the play was inconclusive. And the original call of shot clock violation should have changed.

[derman]

rotation changes twice, please, please see that

No it doesnt. Sec 7-9 show that after it hits the backboard it goes straight to perkins.
And sec 12-14 show that it doesnt hit the rim before it hits the backboard. Even sec 5-7 show that the ball doesnt hit the rim before it hits the backboard.

The commentator was correct, NOT EVEN CLOSE.

HOMECOOKING. Probably the lakers will get the calls in game 6, will go to the FT line 30+ than the Cs, so Stern will be happy that he has his seven game Finals.

[DuMa]

The Celtics got a break from a review when replays showed Allen's 3-pointer barely nicked the rim, giving them the ball with a fresh 24 seconds and 1:05 left. Rasheed Wallace missed a 3-pointer, but the rebound wound up tied up between the 6-foot-11 Garnett and 6-foot-1 Derek Fisher.

The Celtics got a break from a review when replays showed Allen's 3-pointer barely nicked the rim, giving them the ball with a fresh 24 seconds and 1:05 left. Rasheed Wallace missed a 3-pointer, but the rebound wound up tied up between the 6-foot-11 Garnett and 6-foot-1 Derek Fisher.

[DwightHowardMVP]

?????????

are you saying it did not hit the rim?
1. Im saying you dont have a 81 inch Tv

2. From looking at any angle you cant see it touch the rim

3. If they reviewed it, it would have been inconclusive

So La would have had the ball

[Timmy D for MVP]

If you watch the rotation on the ball you can see a change before it hits the backboard. This leads me to believe the ball grazed the rim.

Now I can see that in slow motion but the fact is in real time that'd be impossible to confirm. So if you're not given the ability to look at it with this technology you're just guessing.

I imagine they went off the reaction of the players.

[nosurrender]

When you have to resort to some bullsh!t physics formula that means the play was inconclusive. And the original call of shot clock violation should have changed.

can you guys HONESTLY not see the rotation changing twice from 0:13-0:14

And yea, the "bullsh!t physics formulae" are the ones that you depend on every second of your life...

[nosurrender]

3. If they reviewed it, it would have been inconclusive

So La would have had the ball

??? explain

[Batz]

can you guys HONESTLY not see the rotation changing twice from 0:13-0:14

And yea, the "bullsh!t physics formulae" are the ones that you depend on every second of your life...
Not in that crappy quality, no.

[ginobli2311]

1. Im saying you dont have a 81 inch Tv

2. From looking at any angle you cant see it touch the rim

3. If they reviewed it, it would have been inconclusive

So La would have had the ball

http://www.crutchfield.com/p_690WD82837/Mitsubishi-WD-82837.html?tp=162

great tv for the money.

i saw the angle of the ball change......maybe i need glasses....but based on what i see....the ball clearly hit the rim

[Batz]

http://www.crutchfield.com/p_690WD82837/Mitsubishi-WD-82837.html?tp=162

great tv for the money.

i saw the angle of the ball change......maybe i need glasses....but based on what i see....the ball clearly hit the rim
:oldlol:

[chazzy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OF4dRipXg7I

Watch from :12 -:14. The ball is spinning backwards, then changes rotation after hitting the rim. It goes rim, then backboard. It's subtle, but it's there.

[boozehound]

NO it did NOT hit the rim

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OF4dRipXg7I

The rim didnt shook one little bit, the net didnt shook one little bit, the ball didnt change any direction before it hit the backboard

All who say that it hit the rim are liars
I pity you as a pool player, bball shooter or anything other skill that requires thinking geometrically. The trajectory of the arc clearly changes as it grazes the rim.

besides, this is bball jebus we are talking about here and Nobody ****s with the jesus! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IONyLZn0pLI)

[Leon.Pown]

props to laker fans who can admit the ball MAY have hit the rim (cause it definitely did). all the others saying there was NO way it hit the rim are real butthurt babies. "stern wants 7 games"? get your eyes checked..

[boozehound]

the point is the refs guessed. u cant even 100% say what happened in slo mo, so if they guessed in our favor n c's lost, u guys would be mad too.
listen this is bullshit. you can tell clearly that it grazes the rim. its not inconclusive in the slightest. Which is why the call was changed. every unbiased sports persona (so, not the LA guys or the devils advocate types like skip or collin) will acknowledge that tomorrow if it even comes up.

[derman]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OF4dRipXg7I

Watch from :12 -:14. The ball is spinning backwards, then changes rotation after hitting the rim. It goes rim, then backboard. It's subtle, but it's there.


Its not the same replay. The TV showed the replay of another shot. Amazing sh1t. Look at the last second how the rebound is made with one hand uncontested, and then look at sec 10-12 how the rebound is fought between odom and Perkins.

The TV showed the replay of another shot. Thats why it shows that it hits the rim after it hits the backboard in the last replay.

THE TV faked the REPLAY.

[Derka]

I was scoping Coach Nick's bballbreakdown of Game 5 and he had the replay angle right on the money.

Ball definitely hit the rim.

[derman]

I was scoping Coach Nick's bballbreakdown of Game 5 and he had the replay angle right on the money.

Ball definitely hit the rim.

The TV FAKED the replay. They showed the replay of another shot.

[boozehound]

And you aced that ball hitting the rim part eh? :roll:
the fact that you are laughing about the relevance of the laws of physics here and still doubting it hit the rim proves that you are the dumbest shittiest poster on this site. Which is saying a lot.

[DwightHowardMVP]

listen this is bullshit. you can tell clearly that it grazes the rim. its not inconclusive in the slightest. Which is why the call was changed. every unbiased sports persona (so, not the LA guys or the devils advocate types like skip or collin) will acknowledge that tomorrow if it even comes up.
Then why did the annoucers say it didnt touch the rim

and

"i dont know"

If people cant tell in slow motion but the refs can with the naked eye? :oldlol:

[boozehound]

When you have to resort to some bullsh!t physics formula that means the play was inconclusive. And the original call of shot clock violation should have changed.
I agree. It should have and was changed.

[DwightHowardMVP]

http://www.crutchfield.com/p_690WD82837/Mitsubishi-WD-82837.html?tp=162

great tv for the money.

i saw the angle of the ball change......maybe i need glasses....but based on what i see....the ball clearly hit the rim
Yeah you spent 5 grand on a tv :rolleyes:


hold up i think i left the top down on my Bentley

[boozehound]

The Celtics got a break from a review when replays showed Allen's 3-pointer barely nicked the rim, giving them the ball with a fresh 24 seconds and 1:05 left. Rasheed Wallace missed a 3-pointer, but the rebound wound up tied up between the 6-foot-11 Garnett and 6-foot-1 Derek Fisher.
so, how is it a break when the correct call was made?

[derman]

Then why did the annoucers say it didnt touch the rim

and

"i dont know"

If people cant tell in slow motion but the refs can with the naked eye? :oldlol:


First the announcers saw the first replay which clearly shows that the ball did not touch the rim, and then the announcers saw the second, FAKED, replay, which show that the ball hit the rim, hence the backpedaling " I dont know".

[Derka]

Faked replay? LOL, the people we get here....

I can imagine ABC guys sitting in the trucks "Hey lets fake the replay cos it will be the lulz!" Maybe an ISH.com troll works in the trucks?

[boozehound]

Then why did the annoucers say it didnt touch the rim

and

"i dont know"

If people cant tell in slow motion but the refs can with the naked eye? :oldlol:
uh, I could tell that it hit during live broadcast. There is a clear, but subtle, change in the arc and the rotation changes (and not subtly). clearly all the players on that side of the floor (despite the theatrics) and at least one of the refs also saw that it hit. This is a non-issue to all but the smallest minority of unrealistic fans who cant let it go. Sometimes you do have to deal with a botched call (as a tigers fan, I can attest to that), but this was not. In the slightest.

[derman]

Faked replay? LOL, the people we get here....

I can imagine ABC guys sitting in the trucks "Hey lets fake the replay cos it will be the lulz!" Maybe an ISH.com troll works in the trucks?

Watch the last second of the video, how the rebounder gets the rebound with one hand without any other hand in sight.

Then watch sec 11 to see how the REAL rebound was made by Perkins.


FAKED REPLAY.

[boozehound]

First the announcers saw the first replay which clearly shows that the ball did not touch the rim, and then the announcers saw the second, FAKED, replay, which show that the ball hit the rim, hence the backpedaling " I dont know".
your powers of observation must be minimal. Its clearly the same shot. You can see the arc change in both angles. the rotation is clearer in the second one. but, you can tell its the same shot simply by the change in trajectory off the rim. its the same in both shots.

You must be joking to take it to a dooms level faked-tv conspiracy.

[boozehound]

Watch the last second of the video, how the rebounder gets the rebound with one hand without any other hand in sight.

Then watch sec 11 to see how the REAL rebound was made by Perkins.


FAKED REPLAY.
if it was faked by abc/nba, how come the abc/nba paid announcers (who somehow have an opinion or authority that matters) didnt respond as such?

[derman]

your powers of observation must be minimal. Its clearly the same shot. You can see the arc change in both angles. the rotation is clearer in the second one. but, you can tell its the same shot simply by the change in trajectory off the rim. its the same in both shots.

You must be joking to take it to a dooms level faked-tv conspiracy.


Watch the last second of the video, how the rebounder gets the rebound with one hand without any other hand in sight.

Then watch sec 11 to see how the REAL rebound was made by Perkins.


FAKED REPLAY.

No joke. Look how the rebound was made in sec 11 and sec 17. The Tv crews are covering for Stern and the refs.

[Derka]

Watch the last second of the video, how the rebounder gets the rebound with one hand without any other hand in sight.

Then watch sec 11 to see how the REAL rebound was made by Perkins.


FAKED REPLAY.

No joke. Look how the rebound was made in sec 11 and sec 17. The Tv crews are covering for Stern and the refs.

You. Are. In....saaaane.

[ispin69]

At 0:13 in the clip it clearly changes rotation hitting the rim then bounces off the board.

[D-nugz]

The better question would be - How the f*ck did fisher outjumped garnett?


Easy, Flopping is a good exercise for the legs and timing with that, you have a nice short burst of energy to out jump the taller man.

[DuMa]

Watch the last second of the video, how the rebounder gets the rebound with one hand without any other hand in sight.

Then watch sec 11 to see how the REAL rebound was made by Perkins.


FAKED REPLAY.

No joke. Look how the rebound was made in sec 11 and sec 17. The Tv crews are covering for Stern and the refs.

THIS. IS. THE. GREATEST. JACK IMPERSONATION. I. HAVE. EVER. READ.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_CE3BRa-_7rY/Se4DAWeP7lI/AAAAAAAAB00/2sl0wQjmXi4/s400/one-flew-over-the-cuckoos-nest-1-1024.jpg

[LBJMVP]

Watch the last second of the video, how the rebounder gets the rebound with one hand without any other hand in sight.

Then watch sec 11 to see how the REAL rebound was made by Perkins.


FAKED REPLAY.

No joke. Look how the rebound was made in sec 11 and sec 17. The Tv crews are covering for Stern and the refs.


they are from different views...in the first one you see perkins with odoms outstretched arm reachin in... in the second one you can only see odoms outstreched arm.
this more be the most biased retarded thing i have even seen on this site.

[derman]

You. Are. In....saaaane.

Truth hurts doesnt it. If this is the same rebound than yes, Im insane.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/29192124@N03/4698479249/in/photostream/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/29192124@N03/4698482741/in/photostream/

[LbloodOjunkieG]

I would just like to say, that the dude who keeps saying "FAKED REPLAY" has in all honesty made me laugh out loud. You can't get me to do that often, but as I kept reading this thread, and kept reading "FAKED REPLAY", man, that is pretty funny to me. So thank you!! No joke either. :rockon:

As for the call, as I was watching the game, I thought it was obviously a bad call. It looked, to me, like an air ball and should have been Laker ball. But after watching some videos of it online, it looks pretty clear that the right call was made. The ball definitely hit the rim.

[devin112]

SERIOUSLY!?!?!?!

haha, this shouldn't even be an afterthought or question, let alone have its own thread. IT CLEARLY HIT THE RIM. Only an extreme laker homer who's blind in one eye and half blind in the other would say it didn't hit the rim lolololol.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=4461465&postcount=3

naw man, even the dude above thinks it hit the rim

[derman]

It hit the rim on the FAKED replay.

Look how the REAL rebound was made in REAL replay
http://img94.imageshack.us/i/rebound1.jpg/

And now look how the rebound was made in the FAKED replay, second 17 of the youtube video.
http://img408.imageshack.us/i/rebound2.jpg/

Anyone who claims these are the same rebounds is a liar.
The second rebound is made with one hand, and no other hand in sight.
While the first rebound, the REAL rebound made by perkins, it shows him battling out with odom's hand very close to the ball.

In the REAL replay, odom's palm is lateral to the ball, and it touches the ball while in the FAKED replay, the rebounder's palm is under the ball, with no other hand in sight.

CLEARLY they are not the same rebounds.

The American TV is faking replays, this is CLEAR EVIDENCE. LOL what a JOKE american TV is.

[DaniloGallinari]

It hit the rim on the FAKED replay.

Look how the REAL rebound was made in REAL replay
http://img94.imageshack.us/i/rebound1.jpg/

And now look how the rebound was made in the FAKED replay, second 17 of the youtube video.
http://img408.imageshack.us/i/rebound2.jpg/

Anyone who claims these are the same rebounds is a liar.
The second rebound is made with one hand, and no other hand in sight.
While the first rebound, the REAL rebound made by perkins, it shows him battling out with odom's hand very close to the ball.

In the REAL replay, odom's palm is lateral to the ball, and it touches the ball while in the FAKED replay, the rebounder's palm is under the ball, with no other hand in sight.

CLEARLY they are not the same rebounds.

The American TV is faking replays, this is CLEAR EVIDENCE. LOL what a JOKE american TV is.

Reported. We should only be subjected to so many trolls and idiocy.

[Two Worlds]

It hit the rim on the FAKED replay.

Look how the REAL rebound was made in REAL replay
http://img94.imageshack.us/i/rebound1.jpg/

And now look how the rebound was made in the FAKED replay, second 17 of the youtube video.
http://img408.imageshack.us/i/rebound2.jpg/

Anyone who claims these are the same rebounds is a liar.
The second rebound is made with one hand, and no other hand in sight.
While the first rebound, the REAL rebound made by perkins, it shows him battling out with odom's hand very close to the ball.

In the REAL replay, odom's palm is lateral to the ball, and it touches the ball while in the FAKED replay, the rebounder's palm is under the ball, with no other hand in sight.

CLEARLY they are not the same rebounds.

The American TV is faking replays, this is CLEAR EVIDENCE. LOL what a JOKE american TV is.
:roll:

[Jasi]

It hit the rim on the FAKED replay.

Look how the REAL rebound was made in REAL replay
http://img94.imageshack.us/i/rebound1.jpg/

And now look how the rebound was made in the FAKED replay, second 17 of the youtube video.
http://img408.imageshack.us/i/rebound2.jpg/

Anyone who claims these are the same rebounds is a liar.
The second rebound is made with one hand, and no other hand in sight.
While the first rebound, the REAL rebound made by perkins, it shows him battling out with odom's hand very close to the ball.

In the REAL replay, odom's palm is lateral to the ball, and it touches the ball while in the FAKED replay, the rebounder's palm is under the ball, with no other hand in sight.

CLEARLY they are not the same rebounds.

The American TV is faking replays, this is CLEAR EVIDENCE. LOL what a JOKE american TV is.

This guy can't be serious.

Really, didn't you notice that Lamar reaches higher than Kendrick, misses the ball, and then the ball is grabbed by Kendrick?

And really, can't you see how the ball changes rotation twice?
It's clear in both replays, but even clearer in the first one, that you suppose is the "REAL" one :oldlol:

[JustinJDW]

I honestly thought it didn't hit the rim. Even after I saw the replays, I still didn't think it hit the rim. I just don't see the change in direction. Its pretty ****ing close.

But, the refs and everyone are saying it did, so whatever. Its all good.

[Cyclone112]

I honestly thought it didn't hit the rim. Even after I saw the replays, I still didn't think it hit the rim. I just don't see the change in direction. Its pretty ****ing close.

But, the refs and everyone are saying it did, so whatever. Its all good.

Check out the youtube clip posted earlier and look at the lines on the ball. You can see it clearly change direction once, then hitting the backboard and changing direction again. I thought it was a wrong call as well even after the replays too but when you look at the spin it is obvious.

I'm just surprised they didn't review it, that is impossible to call in real time but at least it was the correct call.

[DwightHowardMVP]

Check out the youtube clip posted earlier and look at the lines on the ball. You can see it clearly change direction once, then hitting the backboard and changing direction again. I thought it was a wrong call as well even after the replays too but when you look at the spin it is obvious.

I'm just surprised they didn't review it, that is impossible to call in real time but at least it was the correct call.

Exactly. You couldnt even tell with repeated slow motion zoomed in replays. And the refs change the call just from huddling? That aint right.

[derman]

This guy can't be serious.

Really, didn't you notice that Lamar reaches higher than Kendrick, misses the ball, and then the ball is grabbed by Kendrick?

And really, can't you see how the ball changes rotation twice?
It's clear in both replays, but even clearer in the first one, that you suppose is the "REAL" one :oldlol:

You and the all others who are calling me insane are not serious.

Didnt you notice that in the second, FAKED replay, the first hand that goes near the ball does not miss it, he grabs the rebound with one hand. http://img408.imageshack.us/i/rebound2.jpg/

You mister, with your observation that Lamar misses the ball, provide clear proof for my argumentation that ESPN is using FAKE replays.

I do not "suppose" that the first replay is the real one. It is absolutely clear that it is the real one. All the players are clearly identified.

In the second, FAKED replay, none of the players are identified.

The ball does not change rotation twice in the REAL replay, the first one. It changes rotation only once.

[Jasi]

Didnt you notice that in the second, FAKED replay, the first hand that goes near the ball does not miss it, he grabs the rebound with one hand. http://img408.imageshack.us/i/rebound2.jpg/

:roll:
not sure if serious
How is that "grabbing a ball"? The ball's falling down and the hand is lateral.




The ball does not change rotation twice in the REAL replay, the first one. It changes rotation only once.

Ok, you're blind then. Or heavily biased.
Bye bye

[derman]

:roll:
not sure if serious
How is that "grabbing a ball"? The ball's falling down and the hand is lateral.


No, its not lateral, its under the ball. In the first, REAL replay, Lamar's hand is lateral.

Clearly the two replays are not of the same shot.

In the first one, the ball, after hitting the glass, doesnt hit the rim, it is rebounded by Perkins after Lamar misses it.

In the second replay the ball, after hitting the glass, hits the rim, and then its rebounded.

Anyone can see this. Bye bye.

[Jasi]

No, its not lateral, its under the ball. In the first, REAL replay, Lamar's hand is lateral.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallax


In the first one, the ball, after hitting the glass, doesnt hit the rim, it is rebounded by Perkins after Lamar misses it.


Of course!
It hits the rim BEFORE hitting the glass...

[Cyclone112]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallax



Of course!
It hits the rim BEFORE hitting the glass...

Dude...

http://fabuloussubs.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/successful-troll-is-successful.jpg

[Jasi]

^ that, or a blind Laker fan :D

[DeeDee]

Only a blind homer would say that it didn't hit the rim.

[MMM]

The NBA just up'ed its ability to fix games I bet they were behind the fake moon landing as well.

[G-train]

Definitely hit the rim IMO. In fact it even sounded like it did when watching it live.

[ukplayer4]

It hit the rim on the FAKED replay.

Look how the REAL rebound was made in REAL replay
http://img94.imageshack.us/i/rebound1.jpg/

And now look how the rebound was made in the FAKED replay, second 17 of the youtube video.
http://img408.imageshack.us/i/rebound2.jpg/

Anyone who claims these are the same rebounds is a liar.
The second rebound is made with one hand, and no other hand in sight.
While the first rebound, the REAL rebound made by perkins, it shows him battling out with odom's hand very close to the ball.

In the REAL replay, odom's palm is lateral to the ball, and it touches the ball while in the FAKED replay, the rebounder's palm is under the ball, with no other hand in sight.

CLEARLY they are not the same rebounds.

The American TV is faking replays, this is CLEAR EVIDENCE. LOL what a JOKE american TV is.



:roll: why is it usually laker fans? :confusedshrug:

[Harison]

Honestly I dont think derman is a Lakers fan, more like Lakers hater trolling others crazy to hate Lakers fanbase even more :roll: No way anyone is THAT stupid, and we've seen plenty of crazy fans.

[Jasi]

Honestly I dont think derman is a Lakers fan, more like Lakers hater trolling others crazy to hate Lakers fanbase even more :roll: No way anyone is THAT stupid, and we've seen plenty of crazy fans.
:oldlol:

[DaniloGallinari]

:oldlol:

Just say "e chi se ne frega" and move on with life.

[Phenith]

http://i41.tinypic.com/33axgma.jpg

[boozehound]

No, its not lateral, its under the ball. In the first, REAL replay, Lamar's hand is lateral.

Clearly the two replays are not of the same shot.

In the first one, the ball, after hitting the glass, doesnt hit the rim, it is rebounded by Perkins after Lamar misses it.

In the second replay the ball, after hitting the glass, hits the rim, and then its rebounded.

Anyone can see this. Bye bye.
wow, this guy is certifiable. So, the ball hits the rim AFTER glass in the borrowed footage? OK

[Perezident]

http://i41.tinypic.com/33axgma.jpg

WINNER!
/thread

[Andrei89]

LOL!

The ball hit the rim.

LOL because of the people who can't see it. How blind can u be rofl?

There are 2 types in this thread

The type that saw it hit the rim but decides to troll and say it didn't

And the ones that clearly are sob slow that they can't see it hitting it

Which one is the OP?

[Floppy]

How anyone who watched it on tv can say it didn't hit the rim is beyond me. And if you watched it on a shitty stream you might want to consider not having an opinion. Against popular belief this really is an option.

3 angles and all showing how it hit the rim.

[boozehound]

How anyone who watched it on tv can say it didn't hit the rim is beyond me. And if you watched it on a shitty stream you might want to consider not having an opinion. Against popular belief this really is an option.

3 angles and all showing how it hit the rim.
I watched it on a shitty stream and it was still clear as day