NBA replay center somehow overturns Buddy Hield foul on Jaylen Brown with 3 seconds left.Wtf?

[robbie84]

So this has been a really good series this season. Pacers and Celtics games have been sooo fun to watch with incredible offenses.
This one has both Tatum and Haliburton missing, right down to the wire.

Then this happens

Watch on YouTube

;si=U0EBXBB3WL1oFMmn

Watch Hield hit Brown's head. Could only see this replay on youtube but somehow the NBA replay center decides that Hield got the ball and not Brown's head lol. Brown even taps his head as he's walking to the line to emphasise the head contact. After the game Hield also admits he fouled Brown.

This foul would have put Brown on the line to go head with 3.2 seconds left, and left the Pacers with no time outs and they would not have been able to advance the ball for the last shot.

What the actual $*@! is this Adam Silver?
I mean it's only a regular season game, but surely something is wrong here if they overturn this?

Hope Halliburton is okay btw, that was hard to watch.

[KyRo23]

Just watched a video on this and was hoping there was a thread on here…

Wow that was one of the worst calls I’ve ever seen. After a replay too? He obvious got hit in the head and the explanation is he hit ball so no foul? Even Buddy looked surprised

[AussieCeltic]

One of the worst calls you’ll ever see.

He clearly hits his head. Lead ref, James Williams who went to school in Indiana, told Jaylen Brown that there was no contact to the head.

I understand missing a call live, but to watch the replay and overturn it makes it by far one of the worst calls you’ll see given the circumstances of the game.

The other thing I noticed was that the whistle was blown while the ball was in the air so KP decided to not compete for the rebound, yet somehow Indiana ended up with possession.

At worst, it should’ve been a jump call.

Horrible ending to a great back and forth game

[DaddyCool19]

So the back of head is part of the ball? Inb4 Draymond kicks someone in the back of the head and show this video as evidence, that it was all ball and a legal play.

[KyRo23]

Also I see people saying because he may have hit ball first, it’s not a foul? If the league has always done this, I haven’t seen it. I often see a player get hit after releasing and get the call. You can’t just whack a player after he releases and it negates the contact

[Mavrelous]

Wow! That is a bizarre review result.

[Nuntius]

That call should have not have been overturned. If the ruling on the floor was no foul then I would understand upholding that call as, in my view at least, Hield makes contact with the ball and the back of Brown's head almost simultaneously. But that was not the ruling on the floor. The ruling on the floor was that this was a foul so for it to be overturned there needs to be clear evidence that no foul was indeed committed. I don't know how anyone can argue that there was clear evidence that no foul was committed here so overturning the call seems 100% wrong.

All that said, I do have to say that this botched call did not necessarily cost the Celtics the game all on its own. First of all, there is no guarantee that Brown would hit both FTs. The Celtics were pretty spotty from the FT line last night (20/29 overall, 69% FT) and Brown himself was 3/5.

But the most important thing to note here is that 3.2 seconds is plenty of time for the Pacers to get a good shot off even without advancing the ball. The Pacers are #1 in pace and will often times shoot with 20 or more seconds remaining in the shot clock. They also are pretty good at scoring at the end of quarters and halves. Just ask Atlanta Hawks fans. Bruce Brown scored at the end of the 2nd half (so, no advancing the ball) with only 4 seconds remaining and that game happened 3 nights ago. Obviously, I'm not claiming that scoring with 3.2 seconds remaining is a guarantee or even that it is easy. I'm just claiming that if there's one team that has a decent chance at doing it, it's this Pacers team.

Basically, what I'm trying to say is this: Overturning the call was bad and shouldn't have happened. That's a given, imo. But that one bad call doesn't delegitimize Indiana's comeback. Because, remember, Indiana was down 9 points at the half. We looked shell-shocked after Haliburton's injury. It took a ton of heart and guts to get back in this game.

Oh, and one last point. There was a Celtics fan on Twitter who claimed that the Pacers are 35-3 when the ref that made the call refs Indiana's game. That is a lie. Basketball reference keeps track of that stuff and the Pacers are 22-20 when the ref in question (James Williams) officiates their games -> https://www.basketball-reference.com/referees/willija99r.html

For comparison's sake, the Celtics are 32-20. Yes, James Williams, the ref in question, did indeed play HS and college basketball in the state of Indiana but that doesn't seem to have had any influence to his call. He doesn't seem biased in favor of Memphis (his place of birth) or Chicago (his place of residence) either as the record of those teams are also close to .500 when he's officiating their games (34-31 for Chicago and 31-28 for Memphis). And since he has been a referee for a long time now (first full season was 10-11) you know that he has caught all of these three franchises in both their contending years (PG Pacers, Rose, Bulls, Grit n' Grind Grizzlies) and tanking years. In other words, the nearly .500 record that these teams have when he's the ref does seem pretty accurate. It doesn't look like any of his personal history affects his call. It just looks like he made a bad call in this specific instance.

[Larry_Russell]

1st they reverse that obvious foul call.

Then they decide against a jumpball and instead give indy the ball.

Then they call a weak foul on KP at end of game.

[Nuntius]

Also I see people saying because he may have hit ball first, it’s not a foul? If the league has always done this, I haven’t seen it. I often see a player get hit after releasing and get the call. You can’t just whack a player after he releases and it negates the contact

People are saying that because that is the explanation that the ref himself provided when he explained the call over the PA during the game. So, people are simply repeating the word of the ref.

I do fully agree that the ref's explanation on this sounds weird.

[Larry_Russell]

All that said, I do have to say that this botched call did not necessarily cost the Celtics the game all on its own. First of all, there is no guarantee that Brown would hit both FTs. The Celtics were pretty spotty from the FT line last night (20/29 overall, 69% FT) and Brown himself was 3/5.

But the most important thing to note here is that 3.2 seconds is plenty of time for the Pacers to get a good shot off even without advancing the ball. The Pacers are #1 in pace and will often times shoot with 20 or more seconds remaining in the shot clock. They also are pretty good at scoring at the end of quarters and halves. Just ask Atlanta Hawks fans. Bruce Brown scored at the end of the 2nd half (so, no advancing the ball) with only 4 seconds remaining and that game happened 3 nights ago. Obviously, I'm not claiming that scoring with 3.2 seconds remaining is a guarantee or even that it is easy. I'm just claiming that if there's one team that has a decent chance at doing it, it's this Pacers team.

Basically, what I'm trying to say is this: Overturning the call was bad and shouldn't have happened. That's a given, imo. But that one bad call doesn't delegitimize Indiana's comeback. Because, remember, Indiana was down 9 points at the half. We looked shell-shocked after Haliburton's injury. It took a ton of heart and guts to get back in this game.

Maybe he would have missed....but he should have had the 2 shots.

Maybe he makes the 1st and intentionally misses the 2nd and that runs more time off clock.

Maybe indy scores a half court heave at buzzer. Who knows cause the refs changed the game.


But tie game, a team on the line for 2 shots with 3.6 seconds left....im picking the team shooting the ball to win

Refs cost celtics the game and gave indy the game.

[Larry_Russell]

Also I see people saying because he may have hit ball first, it’s not a foul? If the league has always done this, I haven’t seen it. I often see a player get hit after releasing and get the call. You can’t just whack a player after he releases and it negates the contact

Its a simple call!

Does brown have the ball in his hands? Yes
Is brown in the act of shooting? Yes
Does buddys movement causr him to hit brown? Yes

2 shots game over.

[OxAndFox]

That call should have not have been overturned. If the ruling on the floor was no foul then I would understand upholding that call as, in my view at least, Hield makes contact with the ball and the back of Brown's head almost simultaneously. But that was not the ruling on the floor. The ruling on the floor was that this was a foul so for it to be overturned there needs to be clear evidence that no foul was indeed committed. I don't know how anyone can argue that there was clear evidence that no foul was committed here so overturning the call seems 100% wrong.

All that said, I do have to say that this botched call did not necessarily cost the Celtics the game all on its own. First of all, there is no guarantee that Brown would hit both FTs. The Celtics were pretty spotty from the FT line last night (20/29 overall, 69% FT) and Brown himself was 3/5.

But the most important thing to note here is that 3.2 seconds is plenty of time for the Pacers to get a good shot off even without advancing the ball. The Pacers are #1 in pace and will often times shoot with 20 or more seconds remaining in the shot clock. They also are pretty good at scoring at the end of quarters and halves. Just ask Atlanta Hawks fans. Bruce Brown scored at the end of the 2nd half (so, no advancing the ball) with only 4 seconds remaining and that game happened 3 nights ago. Obviously, I'm not claiming that scoring with 3.2 seconds remaining is a guarantee or even that it is easy. I'm just claiming that if there's one team that has a decent chance at doing it, it's this Pacers team.

Basically, what I'm trying to say is this: Overturning the call was bad and shouldn't have happened. That's a given, imo. But that one bad call doesn't delegitimize Indiana's comeback. Because, remember, Indiana was down 9 points at the half. We looked shell-shocked after Haliburton's injury. It took a ton of heart and guts to get back in this game.

Oh, and one last point. There was a Celtics fan on Twitter who claimed that the Pacers are 35-3 when the ref that made the call refs Indiana's game. That is a lie. Basketball reference keeps track of that stuff and the Pacers are 22-20 when the ref in question (James Williams) officiates their games -> https://www.basketball-reference.com/referees/willija99r.html

For comparison's sake, the Celtics are 32-20. Yes, James Williams, the ref in question, did indeed play HS and college basketball in the state of Indiana but that doesn't seem to have had any influence to his call. He doesn't seem biased in favor of Memphis (his place of birth) or Chicago (his place of residence) either as the record of those teams are also close to .500 when he's officiating their games (34-31 for Chicago and 31-28 for Memphis). And since he has been a referee for a long time now (first full season was 10-11) you know that he has caught all of these three franchises in both their contending years (PG Pacers, Rose, Bulls, Grit n' Grind Grizzlies) and tanking years. In other words, the nearly .500 record that these teams have when he's the ref does seem pretty accurate. It doesn't look like any of his personal history affects his call. It just looks like he made a bad call in this specific instance.

I'm sorry, but whether it's a call on the floor or not, that's a foul. He hits him in the head. Again, he hits him in the head. It's a foul. Any other talk is just that.

[Nuntius]

1st they reverse that obvious foul call.

Then they decide against a jumpball and instead give indy the ball.

Then they call a weak foul on KP at end of game.

Reversing the call was a bad call, I fully agree. That call should have never been overturned.

However:

Nesmith rebounded the ball when the whistle was blown. This means that it should indeed be Indy ball and not a jumpball. Yes, I do understand the argument that had the whistle not been blown, KP would have probably kept going for the board instead of stopping. But the fact of the matter is that he did stop and that Nesmith was the one who grabbed the rebound. Therefore, giving the ball to Indy was correct.

As for the foul on KP, it was not weak at all. It was absolutely a foul and it would have been called a foul in pretty much every situation. Mathurin was jumping away from KP (therefore, there's no hint of offensive foul or trying to instigate contact here) and KP was jumping into Mathurin's space. He got him in the hands and the lower body. All that KP had to do here was jump straight up and he would probably have contested the shot well enough to force a miss. But he didn't. He jumped towards Mathurin (because Mathurin was fading away) and he couldn't stop his momentum before getting him in the hands and lower body.

[Larry_Russell]

1st they reverse that obvious foul call.

Then they decide against a jumpball and instead give indy the ball.

Then they call a weak foul on KP at end of game.

Reversing the call was a bad call, I fully agree. That call should have never been overturned.

However:

Nesmith rebounded the ball when the whistle was blown. This means that it should indeed be Indy ball and not a jumpball. Yes, I do understand the argument that had the whistle not been blown, KP would have probably kept going for the board instead of stopping. But the fact of the matter is that he did stop and that Nesmith was the one who grabbed the rebound. Therefore, giving the ball to Indy was correct.

As for the foul on KP, it was not weak at all. It was absolutely a foul and it would have been called a foul in pretty much every situation. Mathurin was jumping away from KP (therefore, there's no hint of offensive foul or trying to instigate contact here) and KP was jumping into Mathurin's space. He got him in the hands and the lower body. All that KP had to do here was jump straight up and he would probably have contested the shot well enough to force a miss. But he didn't. He jumped towards Mathurin (because Mathurin was fading away) and he couldn't stop his momentum before getting him in the hands and lower body.

I cannot speak on the KP part cause I havent watched the replay on that recently. Indontbeven remember him jumping at all. Just reaching up/over

As for the jump ball. You cannot give that to indy. Play stopped.

Whistle blew. Play stops. Nothing else matters after that. Thats the way it is.

[OxAndFox]

1st they reverse that obvious foul call.

Then they decide against a jumpball and instead give indy the ball.

Then they call a weak foul on KP at end of game.

Reversing the call was a bad call, I fully agree. That call should have never been overturned.

However:

Nesmith rebounded the ball when the whistle was blown. This means that it should indeed be Indy ball and not a jumpball. Yes, I do understand the argument that had the whistle not been blown, KP would have probably kept going for the board instead of stopping. But the fact of the matter is that he did stop and that Nesmith was the one who grabbed the rebound. Therefore, giving the ball to Indy was correct.

As for the foul on KP, it was not weak at all. It was absolutely a foul and it would have been called a foul in pretty much every situation. Mathurin was jumping away from KP (therefore, there's no hint of offensive foul or trying to instigate contact here) and KP was jumping into Mathurin's space. He got him in the hands and the lower body. All that KP had to do here was jump straight up and he would probably have contested the shot well enough to force a miss. But he didn't. He jumped towards Mathurin (because Mathurin was fading away) and he couldn't stop his momentum before getting him in the hands and lower body.

Not sure how you can talk about anything after the overturned call. If the correct call stands, which it should have, we aren't talking about what you continue on with. Not suggesting either team definitely wins, but it's clear Brown got fouled on that shot. Not just clear at the time because his head moves, but even clearer on the replay.

[lonzo_pelota]

this egregious overturn ranks up there with the absurd foul of tatum on lebron last season, as far as refs changing calls and giving the game to the other team.

[Nuntius]

1st they reverse that obvious foul call.

Then they decide against a jumpball and instead give indy the ball.

Then they call a weak foul on KP at end of game.

Reversing the call was a bad call, I fully agree. That call should have never been overturned.

However:

Nesmith rebounded the ball when the whistle was blown. This means that it should indeed be Indy ball and not a jumpball. Yes, I do understand the argument that had the whistle not been blown, KP would have probably kept going for the board instead of stopping. But the fact of the matter is that he did stop and that Nesmith was the one who grabbed the rebound. Therefore, giving the ball to Indy was correct.

As for the foul on KP, it was not weak at all. It was absolutely a foul and it would have been called a foul in pretty much every situation. Mathurin was jumping away from KP (therefore, there's no hint of offensive foul or trying to instigate contact here) and KP was jumping into Mathurin's space. He got him in the hands and the lower body. All that KP had to do here was jump straight up and he would probably have contested the shot well enough to force a miss. But he didn't. He jumped towards Mathurin (because Mathurin was fading away) and he couldn't stop his momentum before getting him in the hands and lower body.

Not sure how you can talk about anything after the overturned call. If the correct call stands, which it should have, we aren't talking about what you continue on with. Not suggesting either team definitely wins, but it's clear Brown got fouled on that shot. Not just clear at the time because his head moves, but even clearer on the replay.

Larry Russell brought the following calls up and I replied.

[Nuntius]

All that said, I do have to say that this botched call did not necessarily cost the Celtics the game all on its own. First of all, there is no guarantee that Brown would hit both FTs. The Celtics were pretty spotty from the FT line last night (20/29 overall, 69% FT) and Brown himself was 3/5.

But the most important thing to note here is that 3.2 seconds is plenty of time for the Pacers to get a good shot off even without advancing the ball. The Pacers are #1 in pace and will often times shoot with 20 or more seconds remaining in the shot clock. They also are pretty good at scoring at the end of quarters and halves. Just ask Atlanta Hawks fans. Bruce Brown scored at the end of the 2nd half (so, no advancing the ball) with only 4 seconds remaining and that game happened 3 nights ago. Obviously, I'm not claiming that scoring with 3.2 seconds remaining is a guarantee or even that it is easy. I'm just claiming that if there's one team that has a decent chance at doing it, it's this Pacers team.

Basically, what I'm trying to say is this: Overturning the call was bad and shouldn't have happened. That's a given, imo. But that one bad call doesn't delegitimize Indiana's comeback. Because, remember, Indiana was down 9 points at the half. We looked shell-shocked after Haliburton's injury. It took a ton of heart and guts to get back in this game.

Maybe he would have missed....but he should have had the 2 shots.

I agree.

Maybe he makes the 1st and intentionally misses the 2nd and that runs more time off clock.

Maybe indy scores a half court heave at buzzer. Who knows cause the refs changed the game.


But tie game, a team on the line for 2 shots with 3.6 seconds left....im picking the team shooting the ball to win

All of them are definite possibilities.

Refs cost celtics the game and gave indy the game.

The botched call definitely disadvantaged the Celtics. We agree on this. I just wouldn't go as far as saying that it gave Indy the game. That delegitimizes Indiana's comeback a bit and I do not think that this is fair. At the end of the day, the Celtics still had the lead going into the final minute of the game (131-129). The refs weren't the ones that allowed TJ McConnell to spin his way to the bucket (on Jrue Holiday, no less) and tie the game and they weren't the ones that caused Brown to miss the pull-up jumper with 32.1 seconds remaining. The Celtics had a lot of chance to finish the game before that play occurred.

[Lockdown504090]

I think they got it right because of the contact with the ball coming first. I’d you block the shot, there’s more contact allowed afterwards. The challenge is that brown is kinda still shooting the ball after Buddy touches the basketball. This is called a fouls most of thtime during live play. I hope they clarify this on twitter after

[Larry_Russell]

All that said, I do have to say that this botched call did not necessarily cost the Celtics the game all on its own. First of all, there is no guarantee that Brown would hit both FTs. The Celtics were pretty spotty from the FT line last night (20/29 overall, 69% FT) and Brown himself was 3/5.

But the most important thing to note here is that 3.2 seconds is plenty of time for the Pacers to get a good shot off even without advancing the ball. The Pacers are #1 in pace and will often times shoot with 20 or more seconds remaining in the shot clock. They also are pretty good at scoring at the end of quarters and halves. Just ask Atlanta Hawks fans. Bruce Brown scored at the end of the 2nd half (so, no advancing the ball) with only 4 seconds remaining and that game happened 3 nights ago. Obviously, I'm not claiming that scoring with 3.2 seconds remaining is a guarantee or even that it is easy. I'm just claiming that if there's one team that has a decent chance at doing it, it's this Pacers team.

Basically, what I'm trying to say is this: Overturning the call was bad and shouldn't have happened. That's a given, imo. But that one bad call doesn't delegitimize Indiana's comeback. Because, remember, Indiana was down 9 points at the half. We looked shell-shocked after Haliburton's injury. It took a ton of heart and guts to get back in this game.

Maybe he would have missed....but he should have had the 2 shots.

I agree.

Maybe he makes the 1st and intentionally misses the 2nd and that runs more time off clock.

Maybe indy scores a half court heave at buzzer. Who knows cause the refs changed the game.


But tie game, a team on the line for 2 shots with 3.6 seconds left....im picking the team shooting the ball to win

All of them are definite possibilities.

Refs cost celtics the game and gave indy the game.

The botched call definitely disadvantaged the Celtics. We agree on this. I just wouldn't go as far as saying that it gave Indy the game. That delegitimizes Indiana's comeback a bit and I do not think that this is fair. At the end of the day, the Celtics still had the lead going into the final minute of the game (131-129). The refs weren't the ones that allowed TJ McConnell to spin his way to the bucket (on Jrue Holiday, no less) and tie the game and they weren't the ones that caused Brown to miss the pull-up jumper with 32.1 seconds remaining. The Celtics had a lot of chance to finish the game before that play occurred.

the refs changed the last 4 seconds of a tied game.


What had happened previously doesnt matter.

9 points isnt some great accomplishment either. Celtics played a bad 3rd and indy played about as good as they can in the 3rd

4th was back and forth.

We can talk misses from both teams prior the 4 second mark....but its that time to end of game that was impacted by the refs.

Tied game with 4 seconds and the refs came in and took away free throws from the celtics on an egregious error.

I am looking forward to what NBA has to say about this call today