Official Review

[MMM]

Does anyone have a problem that calls made in the first 46 minuets of the game are called differently because of official review. Maybe my problem is i don't quite understand the rule but my thought was that last touch doesn't necessarily determine who the ball went out on but in official review it seems all they look for is last touch. In last nights Pistons vs. Celtics game i felt the refs got the call wrong, here is the play (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ean3q5S51M4)

looks like Stanley Johnson touched it last but i felt Crowder knocked the ball out of his hands and thus should have been Pistons ball. Hand is part of the ball so if the opposition hits my hand causing the ball to fall out of bounds would lead me to think that last touch was on the player that hits my hand.

[plowking]

I agree. I feel as if anything that can't be reviewed during a timeout shouldn't be reviewed, regardless of the 2 minute thing. Really irks me how some things are reviewable and others aren't. I know it has happened a lot of times with goaltends, etc.

All they should be able to change IMO, is whether it was a 2 or 3, or whether it was a goaltend or not. This doesn't change the flow of the game at all like other calls, and you can make them consistently throughout the game, not just in the last minutes.

[Stout]

Does anyone have a problem that calls made in the first 46 minuets of the game are called differently because of official review. Maybe my problem is i don't quite understand the rule but my thought was that last touch doesn't necessarily determine who the ball went out on but in official review it seems all they look for is last touch. In last nights Pistons vs. Celtics game i felt the refs got the call wrong, here is the play (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ean3q5S51M4)

looks like Stanley Johnson touched it last but i felt Crowder knocked the ball out of his hands and thus should have been Pistons ball. Hand is part of the ball so if the opposition hits my hand causing the ball to fall out of bounds would lead me to think that last touch was on the player that hits my hand.
"Hand is part of the ball" is not a real thing, and even when it is referred to, it has to do with foul calls (but hitting the hand is still a foul, just not often called if the hand is holding the ball). As for out of bounds, it is simply the last person to touch the ball.

[Sakkreth]

"Hand is part of the ball" is not a real thing, and even when it is referred to, it has to do with foul calls (but hitting the hand is still a foul, just not often called if the hand is holding the ball). As for out of bounds, it is simply the last person to touch the ball.

This is correct, no further discussion needed.

[MMM]

This is correct, no further discussion needed.

The first 46 mins of the game that same call goes in Det favour 90% of the time though

[MMM]

Rule 8 Section II - c of the NBA rulebook states:

If a player has his hand in contact with the ball and an opponent hits the hand causing the ball to go out-of-bounds, the team whose player had his hand on the ball will retain possession.

looks like they changed this rule but i still see this being called outside of the last 2 mins of play.

[Stout]

Rule 8 Section II - c of the NBA rulebook states:

If a player has his hand in contact with the ball and an opponent hits the hand causing the ball to go out-of-bounds, the team whose player had his hand on the ball will retain possession.

looks like they changed this rule but i still see this being called outside of the last 2 mins of play.

I think that is because to the naked eye, it is hard to tell exactly who touched it last, so when in doubt they call it out on the person who caused it to go out. In the final 2 minutes, replay allows them to break the play down frame by frame. But this is not because of different rules on out of bounds at the end of the game.

[MMM]

"Hand is part of the ball" is not a real thing, and even when it is referred to, it has to do with foul calls (but hitting the hand is still a foul, just not often called if the hand is holding the ball). As for out of bounds, it is simply the last person to touch the ball.

After further review this is not correct at all


https://turnernbahangtime.files.wordpress.com/2015/11/official-nba-rule-book-2015-16.pdf

Rule 8 Section II - C

The ball is caused to go out-of-bounds by the last player to touch it before it goes out, provided it is out-of-bounds because of touching something other than a player.

If the ball is out-of-bounds because of touching a player who is on or outside a boundary, such player caused it to go out.

If a player has his hand in contact with the ball and an opponent
hits the hand causing the ball to go out-of-bounds, the team whose player had his hand on the ball will retain possession

So why did the refs ignore the bold when the play is under review

[MMM]

I think that is because to the naked eye, it is hard to tell exactly who touched it last, so when in doubt they call it out on the person who caused it to go out. In the final 2 minutes, replay allows them to break the play down frame by frame. But this is not because of different rules on out of bounds at the end of the game.

ok but it makes no sense to call something one way for 46 mins and completely differently in the last 2. there should be some consistency in the calls

[Stout]

After further review this is not correct at all


https://turnernbahangtime.files.wordpress.com/2015/11/official-nba-rule-book-2015-16.pdf

Rule 8 Section II - C


So why did the refs ignore the bold when the play is under review
Not, sure. That is different from NBA.com's list of rules. Yours looks more official and that would be news to me.

Maybe it has to do with the rules of the video review. Maybe video review can only review the last to touch the ball and is not allowed to evaluate whether a hand was touched by another hand that touched the ball. :confusedshrug: It would be similar to the idea that video review can be used for out of bounds, but is not used to evaluate fouls at all. That article doesn't address video reviews to verify.

[MMM]

another thing that bothers me is the lack of explanation from refs regarding the review. It could be that the above play was ruled inconclusive rather than last touch being Stanley. In live play if the call is inconclusive it leads to a jump ball so i would like to see the same thing in review situations(iirc, that has actually happened on rare occasions). I'm assuming on the SJ play they are going strictly by last touch

[Stout]

another thing that bothers me is the lack of explanation from refs regarding the review. It could be that the above play was ruled inconclusive rather than last touch being Stanley. In live play if the call is inconclusive it leads to a jump ball so i would like to see the same thing in review situations(iirc, that has actually happened on rare occasions). I'm assuming on the SJ play they are going strictly by last touch

Only problem is the ref may have been 90% sure on what he saw and went to the review to verify, but had no clear angle in the reviews. So should he do a jump ball in that situation despite initially being 90% sure? I think that is why the initial call remains when the video is inconclusive. If the refs were legitimately unsure and the view was also inconclusive, then it should be a jump ball.

[MMM]

Only problem is the ref may have been 90% sure on what he saw and went to the review to verify, but had no clear angle in the reviews. So should he do a jump ball in that situation despite initially being 90% sure? I think that is why the initial call remains when the video is inconclusive. If the refs were legitimately unsure and the view was also inconclusive, then it should be a jump ball.

under review i feel they should go with the most conclusive call

it is pretty evident that Crowder hit the ball out of SJ hands
and i can't tell if SJ made a 2nd touch

if the 2nd part of the play is inconclusive i don't think they should go with the call as stands but go with the most conclusive call that can be determine from review.

[MMM]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTBZ2KR0xEw

they actually got the call right but because it is not explained casual fans aren't aware of the rule. Heck even the god damn announcers aren't aware of the call
:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :facepalm