RealGM

This game was wild.

ijspeelman wrote:

I can't for the life of me understand how anyone could possibly think that's a jump ball.

The Strus is loose!

ijspeelman wrote:

The two minute report is going to be ugly.

Iwasawitness wrote:

ijspeelman wrote:

I can't for the life of me understand how anyone could possibly think that's a jump ball.

Gotta admit from the other angle it looked less like a pull down and more like the defender did get a hold of the ball, and then Garland may have tripped over a foot. Whether that makes it not a foul, I don't know ... the refs often start ignoring things once they feel the ball is "up for grabs".

Clearly we still have a ways to go in terms of fundamentals like dealing with pressure, especially coming out of a timeout when they should have a clear plan.

Strus was amazing, hopefully we see this version of him again in the playoffs.

[youtube][/youtube]

JonFromVA wrote:

Iwasawitness wrote:

ijspeelman wrote:

I can't for the life of me understand how anyone could possibly think that's a jump ball.

Gotta admit from the other angle it looked less like a pull down and more like the defender did get a hold of the ball, and then Garland may have tripped over a foot. Whether that makes it not a foul, I don't know ... the refs often start ignoring things once they feel the ball is "up for grabs".

Clearly we still have a ways to go in terms of fundamentals like dealing with pressure, especially coming out of a timeout when they should have a clear plan.

Strus was amazing, hopefully we see this version of him again in the playoffs.

The problem is that Green can be seen holding Garlands arm. Even if he did in fact trip over his leg (and it’s looking like he did), that’s still a foul on Green.

JonFromVA wrote:

Iwasawitness wrote:

ijspeelman wrote:

I can't for the life of me understand how anyone could possibly think that's a jump ball.

Gotta admit from the other angle it looked less like a pull down and more like the defender did get a hold of the ball, and then Garland may have tripped over a foot. Whether that makes it not a foul, I don't know ... the refs often start ignoring things once they feel the ball is "up for grabs".

Clearly we still have a ways to go in terms of fundamentals like dealing with pressure, especially coming out of a timeout when they should have a clear plan.

Strus was amazing, hopefully we see this version of him again in the playoffs.

[tweet]/tweet]

Iwasawitness wrote:[youtube][/youtube]

JonFromVA wrote:

Iwasawitness wrote:
I can't for the life of me understand how anyone could possibly think that's a jump ball.

Gotta admit from the other angle it looked less like a pull down and more like the defender did get a hold of the ball, and then Garland may have tripped over a foot. Whether that makes it not a foul, I don't know ... the refs often start ignoring things once they feel the ball is "up for grabs".

Clearly we still have a ways to go in terms of fundamentals like dealing with pressure, especially coming out of a timeout when they should have a clear plan.

Strus was amazing, hopefully we see this version of him again in the playoffs.

The problem is that Green can be seen holding Garlands arm. Even if he did in fact trip over his leg (and it’s looking like he did), that’s still a foul on Green.

I can't see much of anything from the video clip you linked.

jbk1234 wrote:

JonFromVA wrote:

Iwasawitness wrote:
I can't for the life of me understand how anyone could possibly think that's a jump ball.

Gotta admit from the other angle it looked less like a pull down and more like the defender did get a hold of the ball, and then Garland may have tripped over a foot. Whether that makes it not a foul, I don't know ... the refs often start ignoring things once they feel the ball is "up for grabs".

Clearly we still have a ways to go in terms of fundamentals like dealing with pressure, especially coming out of a timeout when they should have a clear plan.

Strus was amazing, hopefully we see this version of him again in the playoffs.

[tweet]

Read on Twitter

/tweet]

Green does get his hands on the ball (which you can kind of see from the closeup of this angle) and once that happens the refs do tend to let things play out. If he pulls Garland over trying to rip the ball out of his hands, that's legal. Green's knee under Garland's leg, however, certainly could have been called a foul, but we'll see what the 2-minute report concludes.

JonFromVA wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:

JonFromVA wrote:
Gotta admit from the other angle it looked less like a pull down and more like the defender did get a hold of the ball, and then Garland may have tripped over a foot. Whether that makes it not a foul, I don't know ... the refs often start ignoring things once they feel the ball is "up for grabs".

Clearly we still have a ways to go in terms of fundamentals like dealing with pressure, especially coming out of a timeout when they should have a clear plan.

Strus was amazing, hopefully we see this version of him again in the playoffs.

[tweet]

Read on Twitter

/tweet]

Green does get his hands on the ball (which you can kind of see from the closeup of this angle) and once that happens the refs do tend to let things play out. If he pulls Garland over trying to rip the ball out of his hands, that's legal. Green's knee under Garland's leg, however, certainly could have been called a foul, but we'll see what the 2-minute report concludes.

Jon, Green clearly has no part of the ball when he pulls Garland down. None.

jbk1234 wrote:

JonFromVA wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:
[tweet]

Read on Twitter

/tweet]

Green does get his hands on the ball (which you can kind of see from the closeup of this angle) and once that happens the refs do tend to let things play out. If he pulls Garland over trying to rip the ball out of his hands, that's legal. Green's knee under Garland's leg, however, certainly could have been called a foul, but we'll see what the 2-minute report concludes.

Jon, Green clearly has no part of the ball when he pulls Garland down. None.

Like I said, once the defender successfully gets his hands on the ball, refs will often just swallow their whistle and let things play out even to the point of a scrum or scramble on the floor.

It's also likely no ref was able to see both angles, just like we're only looking at one angle; but the broadcast did capture the other angle and it's disingenuous really for anyone to talk about the play without showing all the angles available.

JonFromVA wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:

JonFromVA wrote:
Green does get his hands on the ball (which you can kind of see from the closeup of this angle) and once that happens the refs do tend to let things play out. If he pulls Garland over trying to rip the ball out of his hands, that's legal. Green's knee under Garland's leg, however, certainly could have been called a foul, but we'll see what the 2-minute report concludes.

Jon, Green clearly has no part of the ball when he pulls Garland down. None.

Like I said, once the defender successfully gets his hands on the ball, refs will often just swallow their whistle and let things play out even to the point of a scrum or scramble on the floor.

It's also likely no ref was able to see both angles, just like we're only looking at one angle; but the broadcast did capture the other angle and it's disingenuous really for anyone to talk about the play without showing all the angles available.

There are three officials looking at the court from three angles for a reason. Garland was dragged down to the court, back first, with the ball still in his hands, and no defenders hands on it. Someone saw that.

Did you all see where Strus hit a similar shot when he played D2 college ball?

jbk1234 wrote:

JonFromVA wrote:

jbk1234 wrote:
Jon, Green clearly has no part of the ball when he pulls Garland down. None.

Like I said, once the defender successfully gets his hands on the ball, refs will often just swallow their whistle and let things play out even to the point of a scrum or scramble on the floor.

It's also likely no ref was able to see both angles, just like we're only looking at one angle; but the broadcast did capture the other angle and it's disingenuous really for anyone to talk about the play without showing all the angles available.

There are three officials looking at the court from three angles for a reason. Garland was dragged down to the court, back first, with the ball still in his hands, and no defenders hands on it. Someone saw that.

The refs can't combine all their views of a play in time synchronization like a video editor, they will usually defer to the refs who they think had the best angle.

Apparently that ref saw Green getting his hands on the ball, Garland twisting and wrenching the ball out of his hands, then tripping over his knee. Looks like Mitchell actually called the timeout about a second after Garland was tripped.

The two minute report is up:
https://official.nba.com/l2m/L2MReport.html?gameId=0022300832

The only mistake they saw is that Allen should have been called for 3 seconds at 1:54.

Of note ...

"12.0: Green (DAL) gets his hand on the ball to tie up Garland (CLE) before incidental contact occurs between the two players."

"3.8: Allen (CLE) gets to the height of the ball and makes contact with it during Washington's (DAL) shot attempt at the basket. Any ensuing contact with Washington's wrist is marginal."

JonFromVA wrote:The two minute report is up:
https://official.nba.com/l2m/L2MReport.html?gameId=0022300832

The only mistake they saw is that Allen should have been called for 3 seconds at 1:54.

Of note ...

"12.0: Green (DAL) gets his hand on the ball to tie up Garland (CLE) before incidental contact occurs between the two players."

"3.8: Allen (CLE) gets to the height of the ball and makes contact with it during Washington's (DAL) shot attempt at the basket. Any ensuing contact with Washington's wrist is marginal."

And calling that incidental contact is why no one takes NBA officiating seriously anymore.