RealGM

I was watching this game last night and couldn't believe my eyes. This has to be proof that the refs are crooked and paid off.

I and 1'd before I read your second sentence...

horrendous call for sure though.

basketballwacko2 wrote:This has to be proof that the refs ...

never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence.

Napoleon

Sent from my phone.

Wizop wrote:

basketballwacko2 wrote:This has to be proof that the refs ...

never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence.

Napoleon

Sent from my phone.

I thought you have to go through training if you want to be an NBA ref. That should prevent this level of incompetence.

Jstock12 wrote:

Wizop wrote:

basketballwacko2 wrote:This has to be proof that the refs ...

never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence.

Napoleon

Sent from my phone.

I thought you have to go through training if you want to be an NBA ref. That should prevent this level of incompetence.

But not the incredible fallabilities inherent in human vision

Jstock12 wrote:

Wizop wrote:

basketballwacko2 wrote:This has to be proof that the refs ...

never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence.

Napoleon

Sent from my phone.

I thought you have to go through training if you want to be an NBA ref. That should prevent this level of incompetence.

All refs are bought and taught who to favor and when to call, or not call a foul.

WWE got nothing on them.

BooomBaby wrote:

Jstock12 wrote:

Wizop wrote:
never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence.

Napoleon

Sent from my phone.

I thought you have to go through training if you want to be an NBA ref. That should prevent this level of incompetence.

All refs are bought and taught who to favor and when to call, or not call a foul.

WWE got nothing on them.

Sure, you could think that. Or, you could understand that referees call what they see. A camera angle may be the complete opposite side of what the refs see. And refs are operating from their viewpoint, with different angles and vision than long throw lenses from the upper deck.

Sure, this was a horribly missed call. But I’d be interested to see mapped where the refs were on court and where all the players were to see what blocked their views or what the breakdown was.

There is no way that the two refs on either side of the corner, could have missed that call. What the hell are they suppose to be looking at on a play like that? I think they might want to look at the guys feet in relation to the sidelines.

If you watch the clip both of Durants feet are a foot outside the lines. He took 2 steps outta bounds.

There should have been a ref on the baseline

Who was it?

CoachD wrote:There should have been a ref on the baseline

Who was it?

There was one but I don't know the guys name. Mr Lotta Bucks, Mr Blind Asa Bat?