In the last 30 seconds of the game, the refs should be able to review any play that results in a change on the scoreboard. Foot on the line threes and goaltending calls would be the big focus.
I think the NBA should have Foster show up in Portland and get egged for at least 30 seconds. That will make me feel better.
Was that call ineligable to be reviewed by the refs? There shouldn't have been a reason why they couldn't have gone to the video replay.
Cannot remember where I heard it this morning, but someone said goaltending was not a reviewable call. Agreed that they should have been able to look at it, along with any other call that they think is critical. You watch though. Scott Foster will probably be rewarded with a deep playoff schedule for having the balls to call goal tending from half court against a hostile home team.
The rationale is that the ball is live when they need to review. It's unfair to stop in the middle of a possession as it could negate any advantage for the team with the ball. Frankly, I agree, unless the ball goes out of bounds as a result of the goaltend.
That play was really, really close, so I don't have any real heartburn with a ref getting it wrong. That's going to happen in basketball and it's a part of the game. What I do have a problem with is what many others have said, in such a critical situation why does Foster, the ref farthest from the play and at an angle that would make it impossible for him to know whether it was a block or not, make the call when the two refs who were closer and in better position don't? I know that the NBA doesn't make it's discipline decisions with the refs public, but I really hope Foster gets a fine or some other form of punishment for this.
But the call did stop the play. Once the play is stopped, then a review could be made. I think if a coach wanted the play to be reviewed; they could call a time out if they had possession.
Sorry, I was kind of wrong in my explanation. Say the goaltend is reviewable. In the event of a goaltend, the ball goes to the other team. But in the event of a block, the ball is live and up for grabs. What happens when the call is reviewed and the goaltend is removed? Who do you give the ball to? You just said the ball was blocked but you can't determine who has possession because the goaltend was called on the floor.
No I get that but Portland had possession of the ball. In that circumstance; he had possession either way. Nate could have called a timeout and asked for a review.
Wallace already had the ball when the whistle was blown. In cases like that, where possession is determined before the official stops play, that team keeps possession (if the goaltending is overturned). In situations where the ball is loose when the whistle blows and the goaltending is overturned, jump ball at the free throw circle of the side where the block occurred. Only review goal tends that are called, not blocks that are not called goaltends.
My biggest complaint is if it is that close, as an official, you shouldn't blow the whistle unless you definitively see a foul or a violation. Something caused Scott Foster to make up a call standing near mid-court. A call that replay shows was an incorrect call, and a call the cost the Blazers a second win against the team with the best record in the NBA. Any other sport outside of the farce called the NBA, and people would be outraged. Problem is, in the NBA, this sort of thing isn't unusual.
I know that, but technically the play stops when the goaltend is called. So Wallace technically has possession after the play stops. That's unfair to the other team. A jump ball is also stupid. I hate guesstimate jump balls like the ones that happen when officials genuinely aren't sure of a call. Inherently unfair.
The play stops at the goaltend, regardless of WHEN the whistle was called, and I'm sure you'd be screaming unfair if roles were reversed.
As it stands now, NBA rules hardly care about what is fair. Wallace has that ball before the whistle blows, so it is not unfair in the least to say that the Blazers would have had possession if the goaltend has not been whistled. The other situation is better than not reviewing, IMHO. Also the NBA could encourage refs to wait until possession is determined before whistling to review the goaltend. Say the ref sees a goaltend but OKC gets the quick rebound for the putback. He swallows his whistle because the right result occurred. Refs already do this with blocking fouls on shots, sometimes not blowing the whistle until they see the shot isn't going to go in. Lots of interpretive leeway is already given.
Hardly; if the call was reviewed and stood (and if LMA had actually goaltended) then at least they reviewed it and put the right two points on the board.
The NBA is full of judgment calls. Why don't you just review every foul called during a game, since there's sure to be blown calls on both sides during the course of a game? The goaltend last night was just that, a judgment call. A ref made a mistake but you move on.
