PDA

View Full Version : Sacramento Kings appeal loss to Grizzlies



KingsMadness44
11-17-2014, 04:49 PM
What do you guys think about this? Do you think that the Kings have a legit shot at winning this appeal?

I personally think they should win this appeal, not that they deserved to win after blowing a 26 point lead. However, rules are rules. Even if Hollins didnt touch the in bound pass, which it does look like he did even though its slight, the clock did not start until after the ball had already left Lee's hand so the shot should not have counted.

Now i know that being a Kings fan you guys will probably just say that i'm being a homer or a sore loser. But if it were your team in the exact same position, what would you want to happen or how would you judge?

so just wondering if you think the Kings will win the appeal or not? and please give reasons as to why you vote either way....

Bruno
11-17-2014, 04:51 PM
whens the last time this happened and has it ever been overturned?? I gotta say I didn't even know this was an option.

Goose17
11-17-2014, 04:55 PM
I didn't know there was an issue. Looked good to me.

Hawkeye15
11-17-2014, 05:01 PM
every team has been screwed. I would be shocked if they overturned the result

KingsMadness44
11-17-2014, 05:01 PM
the last time an appeal was won was back in 2007 for the maimi heat vs the hawks. Shaq was wrongfully fouled out of the game after being charged with his 5th foul the scores people ****ed it up and said that he had 6 with a minute left in a close game that miami eventually lost.

they won there appeal and replayed the last minute of the game following there next game against atlanta

KingsMadness44
11-17-2014, 05:04 PM
every team has been screwed. I would be shocked if they overturned the result

i agree that every team has been screwed BUT isnt that the reason for the replay system, to avoid mistakes like this?

here is a link for proof as to why they got the call wrong

http://uproxx.com/sports/2014/11/the-grizzlies-buzzer-beater-should-not-have-counted-and-heres-why/

jeb4056
11-17-2014, 05:08 PM
I'm not a Kings fan, but they were definately robbed. No way can that shot get off with 0.3 seconds.

InRoseWeTrust
11-17-2014, 05:18 PM
I'm not a Kings fan, but they were definately robbed. No way can that shot get off with 0.3 seconds.

And it's not only that. Hollins clearly god a piece of the ball on the inbound. It should have been a King's W.

jaydubb
11-17-2014, 05:20 PM
I thought there was some kind of rule that the least amount of time that a player can catch and shoot was .4 seconds and I think this got brought up in the playoffs 2004 I believe when Derek Fisher hit that shot at the end of the game with .4 second left to beat the Spurs. Could be wrong about the rule tho

rhino17
11-17-2014, 05:25 PM
The Kings are 100% correct, but nothing will happen

by rule, you can only do a "tip-in" if there is less than .4 seconds left. This was clearly not a tip in, it should not have couldn't, refs ****ed up

lamzoka
11-17-2014, 05:40 PM
The Kings are 100% correct, but nothing will happen

by rule, you can only do a "tip-in" if there is less than .4 seconds left. This was clearly not a tip in, it should not have couldn't, refs ****ed up

The only way the Kings win this appeal is if Ryan Hollins indeed did tip the inbound. But as far as Courtney Lee's shot, it's good. "The Trent Tucker Rule" is .3 seconds NOT .4

By rule you can catch and shoot with .3, anything less than than must be a tip in. Counting human reaction to start the clock plus the trent tucker rule, Lee's shot is good.

NOW THE INBOUND TIP IS ANOTHER STORY.

nastynice
11-17-2014, 05:40 PM
I wish the kings won that game, but I think they legit lost. Its close. Thing is, if the ball didn't even change its rotation (according link in post 6), much less trajectory, how can you be so sure that Hollins got a piece of it on the inbound?

Also, the reverse, he was midreverse already when he caught it. Seems to me he got it off in time.

I could be missing something, or some kinda angle I didn't see, I don't know, but from what I've seen I don't see any good reason to change it.

lamzoka
11-17-2014, 05:45 PM
I wish the kings won that game, but I think they legit lost. Its close. Thing is, if the ball didn't even change its rotation (according link in post 6), much less trajectory, how can you be so sure that Hollins got a piece of it on the inbound?

Also, the reverse, he was midreverse already when he caught it. Seems to me he got it off in time.

I could be missing something, or some kinda angle I didn't see, I don't know, but from what I've seen I don't see any good reason to change it.

Unless the Kings have a clear video evidence that Hollins tip the inbound, they lost. By rule Courtney lee's shot is good.

Goose17
11-17-2014, 05:47 PM
Did Hollins tip it? Clock should have started then surely?

tredigs
11-17-2014, 05:56 PM
Absolutely will not change it.
1.The tip from Hollins - even if it did actually occur - is pretty much impossible to see and can't be definitively overturned. In his ultra zoom still it looks like it might indeed have touched, but that could also just be the angle. Too tough to tell.
2. Humans are not quick enough to start/stop a timer down to the hundredth of a second or even a tenth in most occasions. Hence the "Tucker rule" for 3 tenths (this exact situation). Already being mid-air and getting rid of the ball almost immediately is the definition of what the rule is made for. Even by his own analysis, the author of this article concedes that it could have been 0.4 tenths of a second, where at 0.3 you could technically be at 0.39 tenths. Pretty much impossible to be that precise.
3. On a personal note, **** the Kings. I would have never had the audacity to blow that monster lead, have NOBODY IN THE PAINT FOR THE FINAL SHOT while he takes his open oop, and then try to find the most menial ways to challenge the game and try to snake out of it.

Hawkeye15
11-17-2014, 06:12 PM
no, that shot shouldn't have counted. But there is no way on earth the league opens a can of worms by changing that.

Hawkeye15
11-17-2014, 06:13 PM
and who leaves the paint open in that situation? Seriously, what the hell were the Kings thinking?

goingfor28
11-17-2014, 06:14 PM
I'm not a Kings fan, but they were definately robbed. No way can that shot get off with 0.3 seconds.
This

KingPosey
11-17-2014, 06:16 PM
Im a King's fan and it does look like he maybe touched the ball on the inbounds. But that's just it, it only looks like he MAYBE touched the ball. This wont and shouldn't be overturned. Don't give up 26 point leads and you wont lose is what id tell the guys.

KingsMadness44
11-17-2014, 06:31 PM
it'll be interesting to see but idk if anyone clicked on the actual link i posted. Someone from twitter posted the his PRV records a 30 frames a second and Courtney Lee had the ball for 13 frames which equals out to .43 seconds. so regardless if hollins tipped it or not the shot shouldnt have counted....

i mean i agree with everyone that there is absolutely no way the Kings DESERVE to win after blowing a 26 point lead but they still should have won because the shot should not have counted

Hawkeye15
11-17-2014, 06:38 PM
it'll be interesting to see but idk if anyone clicked on the actual link i posted. Someone from twitter posted the his PRV records a 30 frames a second and Courtney Lee had the ball for 13 frames which equals out to .43 seconds. so regardless if hollins tipped it or not the shot shouldnt have counted....

i mean i agree with everyone that there is absolutely no way the Kings DESERVE to win after blowing a 26 point lead but they still should have won because the shot should not have counted

nope, the shot shouldn't have counted. And if it went the Kings way, it wouldn't be overturned either.

The NBA probably has no business changing the outcome of a game as close as this, it would have to be so blatant, its not even funny.

tredigs
11-17-2014, 06:39 PM
it'll be interesting to see but idk if anyone clicked on the actual link i posted. Someone from twitter posted the his PRV records a 30 frames a second and Courtney Lee had the ball for 13 frames which equals out to .43 seconds. so regardless if hollins tipped it or not the shot shouldnt have counted....

i mean i agree with everyone that there is absolutely no way the Kings DESERVE to win after blowing a 26 point lead but they still should have won because the shot should not have counted
Actually he said he could not quite tell and that it could have been .40 tenths. Which is where my 0.39 tenths comment comes in.

Regardless, the Trent Tucker rule was made for this play. You either overturn this and revamp the entire model for how replay is initiated; are we going by frame rates and trying to calculate accordingly now? That shouldn't add any time to the process... : / Or, are we inserting a microchip into a ball that is both touch sensitive and synchronized with the buzzer that we can turn on at the end of quarters and 24 second violations? Make sure it wasn't a false-positive because the shot was tipped by the defender on the way in, though... there's another issue.

Bottom line, at 0.3 tenths this shot counts every time. Moving on.


nope, the shot shouldn't have counted. And if it went the Kings way, it wouldn't be overturned either.

The NBA probably has no business changing the outcome of a game as close as this, it would have to be so blatant, its not even funny.

By what standard are you saying it should not have counted?

Hawkeye15
11-17-2014, 06:42 PM
Actually he said he could not quite tell and that it could have been .40 tenths. Which is where my 0.39 tenths comment comes in.

Regardless, the Trent Tucker rule was made for this play. You either overturn this and revamp the entire model for how replay is initiated; are we going by frame rates and trying to calculate accordingly now? That shouldn't add any time to the process... : / Or, are we inserting a microchip into a ball that is both touch sensitive and synchronized with the buzzer that we can turn on at the end of quarters and 24 second violations? Make sure it wasn't a false-positive because the shot was tipped by the defender on the way in, though... there's another issue.

Bottom line, at 0.3 tenths this shot counts every time. Moving on.



By what standard are you saying it should not have counted?

that shot took way to long to leave his hands, but whatever. If the TT rule allows a player to catch and hitch before shooting, fine. But I always thought it had to be a tip.

tredigs
11-17-2014, 06:49 PM
that shot took way to long to leave his hands, but whatever. If the TT rule allows a player to catch and hitch before shooting, fine. But I always thought it had to be a tip.

Nah, they made it so at 0.3 you can catch and shoot (I think it breaks down to the fact that there's no telling whether the prior play(s) were stopped precisely on time as well, making it so he would feasibly have the time to catch/shoot had human error not been involved on those plays). Being mid-air on the catch and putting it in probably took him less time than many other shots in this situation that did or would count. You can't actually catch and shoot in 0.3 tenths. That's just the rule.

0.2 tenths is reserved for tip ins and high oops.

I'm fine with them changing the rules all together to 0.5 tenths+ for plays that are not direct oop dunks or tip-ins, because that might be more reasonable (I think I saw a sports-science where an average Ray Allen catch and shoot takes 0.7 tenths) but as the rules stand it's open/shut.

Vinny642
11-17-2014, 06:52 PM
and who leaves the paint open in that situation? Seriously, what the hell were the Kings thinking?

This.... poor coaching there. Dont chase players around, just sit in the paint and wait.

Hawkeye15
11-17-2014, 06:53 PM
Nah, they made it so at 0.3 you can catch and shoot (I think it breaks down to the fact that there's no telling whether the prior play(s) were stopped precisely on time as well, making it so he would feasibly have the time to catch/shoot had human error not been involved on those plays). Being mid-air on the catch and putting it in probably took him less time than many other shots in this situation that did or would count. You can't actually catch and shoot in 0.3 tenths. That's just the rule.

0.2 tenths is reserved for tip ins and high oops.

I'm fine with them changing the rules all together to 0.5 tenths+ for plays that are not direct oop dunks or tip-ins, because that might be more reasonable (I think I saw a sports-science where an average Ray Allen catch and shoot takes 0.7 tenths) but as the rules stand it's open/shut.

hmm, I thought the cutoff was at 0.3 seconds for the tip in only. I will look up the rule

KingsMadness44
11-17-2014, 06:54 PM
well then the only way is that the Kings have clear evidence that Hollins tipped the ball. its only one game and this shouldnt be a discussion but oh well

tredigs
11-17-2014, 07:13 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trent_Tucker_Rule


The Article 16.2.5 of the 2010 FIBA Official Rules state: "The game clock must indicate 0:00.3 (three tenths of a second) or more for a player to gain control of the ball on a throw-in or on a rebound after the last or only free throw in order to attempt a shot for a field goal. If the game clock indicates 0:00.2 or 0:00.1 the only type of a valid field goal made is by tapping or directly dunking the ball."

tredigs
11-17-2014, 07:24 PM
I should be clear that if the buzzer DID actually light red around the board before he got rid of it, obviously that shot does not count. But, in a situation where they started it maybe a tenth of a second late (pretty standard), and he gets it off in time, I don't see any grounds to overturn. That's the human error variance and part of the reason why the rule exists.

And actually I just paused it on the youtube replay where the ball was actually 100% out of his hands and at the rim level when the clock still read 0.2. So, no way in hell can they overturn that.

edit: Unless they can in fact definitively prove Hollins touched it and that is grounds to void the shot all together. From what I've seen that isn't possible, but maybe Sac sent them the perfect angle and it's indisputable.

nastynice
11-17-2014, 07:34 PM
it'll be interesting to see but idk if anyone clicked on the actual link i posted. Someone from twitter posted the his PRV records a 30 frames a second and Courtney Lee had the ball for 13 frames which equals out to .43 seconds. so regardless if hollins tipped it or not the shot shouldnt have counted....


I know this brings substance to the pov that the shot was no good, but c'mon, we can't sit here and start going frame by frame on these types of plays. If its THAT close that you need to start going frame by frame and use a microscope to look at it, its probably just best left alone. Like the other guy said, at this point what the hell, are we gonna start putting microchips inside the ball to give us a more precise call? Feel the same way I felt about the Derek Fisher shot, ball hit his hand, clock started, ball was out of his hand before the red light came on. Wether or not the clock started .05 sec late, its just ridiculous. If there's something blatant there, like starting 2 seconds late, ok I understand, but I don't think its reasonable to start expecting the clock control to be spot on the hundredth of a second.

nastynice
11-17-2014, 07:36 PM
3. On a personal note, **** the Kings. I would have never had the audacity to blow that monster lead, have NOBODY IN THE PAINT FOR THE FINAL SHOT while he takes his open oop, and then try to find the most menial ways to challenge the game and try to snake out of it.

I agree with this. If kings FANS want to make noise about it, that's fine, I'm ok with that. But for the coaching staff to start making noise about it, that's just low, straight up. They should be embarrassed of themselves for even bringing this up. Give a ref an ear full at the end of the game, and move on, imo

Shady66
11-17-2014, 08:21 PM
The refs just missed it, play went on and the crazy tip in by Lee was good. Game over. It sucks but it happens

koreancabbage
11-17-2014, 09:30 PM
well they used the NBA replay center to uphold the call on the play - which was a made field goal.

so i mean - if they say no, that would be contradicting themselves and the whole point and throw into doubt the use of the replay center and thus would render the system useless and questionable.

so no, it won't be recanted.

True Sports Fan
11-17-2014, 10:13 PM
NBA isn't going to do ****, even though it was clearly ****ing blown. I understand not starting the clock on time, but don't you look at the ****ing clock and Lee touching the ball when looking at the replay for five minutes? Also looks like Hollins tipped the ball, while it was not totally conclusive, trajectory of the ball definitely look like it dipped after it was tipped.

True Sports Fan
11-17-2014, 10:16 PM
I agree with this. If kings FANS want to make noise about it, that's fine, I'm ok with that. But for the coaching staff to start making noise about it, that's just low, straight up. They should be embarrassed of themselves for even bringing this up. Give a ref an ear full at the end of the game, and move on, imo

So if your team was already questionable playoff team at best, and lost an important game you'd just accept the loss? Yes they need to improve on closing out games, but just because they blew a 20+ point lead should you disregard evidence that overturns the basket.

I guess as far as the NBA cares it looks better to fans with a gw from a 20+ point deficit...

koreancabbage
11-17-2014, 10:21 PM
TBH, maybe this was a sign not to blow 20+ point leads in the future lol #realitycheck

likemystylez
11-17-2014, 10:21 PM
What do you guys think about this? Do you think that the Kings have a legit shot at winning this appeal?

I personally think they should win this appeal, not that they deserved to win after blowing a 26 point lead. However, rules are rules. Even if Hollins didnt touch the in bound pass, which it does look like he did even though its slight, the clock did not start until after the ball had already left Lee's hand so the shot should not have counted.

Now i know that being a Kings fan you guys will probably just say that i'm being a homer or a sore loser. But if it were your team in the exact same position, what would you want to happen or how would you judge?

so just wondering if you think the Kings will win the appeal or not? and please give reasons as to why you vote either way....

Based on hollins reaction- I really do believe he touched it... but they looked at it really hard back in the replay center and he just didnt get enough of it to make the camara prove it.

as far as the clock starting late- the shot was so quick the clock guy went as fast as he could (lol and if thats the case- the clock probably starts about 1/2 second late a few dozen times a game. LOL you cant have teams protesting that.

Kings blew a 26 point lead and allowed a guy to get to the rim with nobody near him. You always station a big guy at the rim to intercept tip ins. I dont think there was enough time for the kings to catch and get off a 3 point shot. The defense should have forced a long jump shot.

Verdict- Kings will not get this overturned. if it was gonna happen, it would have happened right there on the spot

likemystylez
11-17-2014, 10:23 PM
I agree with this. If kings FANS want to make noise about it, that's fine, I'm ok with that. But for the coaching staff to start making noise about it, that's just low, straight up. They should be embarrassed of themselves for even bringing this up. Give a ref an ear full at the end of the game, and move on, imo

well- in the kings coachings defense. this game as a disaster- this would give me bad dreams if I was a player

likemystylez
11-17-2014, 10:24 PM
TBH, maybe this was a sign not to blow 20+ point leads in the future lol #realitycheck

ouch! unfortunately dead on though

Sactown
11-17-2014, 10:27 PM
Reality is we shouldn't of blown a lead like that.. Cousins gets in foul trouble and these things happen we are 34 points worse with him off the floor.. but there's some very good evidence hollins touched that ball

likemystylez
11-17-2014, 10:29 PM
i agree that every team has been screwed BUT isnt that the reason for the replay system, to avoid mistakes like this?

here is a link for proof as to why they got the call wrong

http://uproxx.com/sports/2014/11/the-grizzlies-buzzer-beater-should-not-have-counted-and-heres-why/

it kinda makes you wonder about all the griz wins this year- are they really an elite team or are the refs just handing them all their wins

mzgrizz
11-17-2014, 11:40 PM
Really. I understand your pain Kings fans but they reviewed it in the replay center in NYC for about 5 minutes. Korean Cabbage was straight up. How do they reverse that ? And do you guess our smothering defense that caused so many Rox turnovers tonight was a gimme from the refs? SMH. Grizz are just damn good.

DemarDerozan
11-17-2014, 11:45 PM
Damn... Why does the NBA always pick a team to **** on every year?

nastynice
11-17-2014, 11:49 PM
So if your team was already questionable playoff team at best, and lost an important game you'd just accept the loss? Yes they need to improve on closing out games, but just because they blew a 20+ point lead should you disregard evidence that overturns the basket.

I guess as far as the NBA cares it looks better to fans with a gw from a 20+ point deficit...

well I guess I feel that way because there's really no solid reason to believe they made the wrong call. Show me something if I'm wrong here, but the site making an argument FOR the kings themselves said that the ball didn't even change rotation, much less trajectory, as far as Hollins tipping it or not. You can't overturn it based off of his reaction. With all the flopping going on, can you imagine what can of worms would open up had they changed the ruling based on his reaction??

And as far as the shot clock, he caught it mid air layup. There's no reason to believe he didn't get it off in time. If you have to go to start counting frames in order to get the time correct, well, that's just a direction I wouldn't care for the league to head in. All that tells you is that it was close enough for it to have gone either way. Had the guy done like a straight up catch and shoot, or something that blatantly you know takes more than 0.3 seconds, I would agree with them. But he basically got a shot off as fast you possibly can without it being a tip in.

My thing is, they're complaining about a play that they can't even legitimately say wether it was a right or wrong call. It was so close.

EDIT** actually, I misread, the site said it DID change rotation. So I don't know, I can't really tell, but if it did, and you can see the replay and see that it DOES change rotation, then they have a legitimate case here.

Wrigheyes4MVP
11-18-2014, 12:25 AM
Truth is.... Hollins got a piece of it. You can see not only the ball change directions, but also his finger move backwards just a bit right as the ball passes by his hand (the angle looking from the backside of Hollins). I don't think we will see an overruled call, but the refs definitely got the wrong call IMO. Even with replay, nothing is full proof.

sf-fanatic
11-18-2014, 12:54 AM
I can't tell if Hollins touched the ball, but it looked like the clock guy started the clock a little late but thats not protestable. I'm surprised this call is even protestable. I always thought only obvious application of rules failure or score and book failures were protestable. If this is overturned, whats preventing teams from protesting buzzer-beaters at the end of the first, second, or third quarters ? Isnt a point in those quarters worth the same as a point late in the game ?

Are they going to get more camera angles or the same ones that they used on replay ? I'm sure in replay they determined the ball didn't touch Hollins hand and the basket was good.

Jeffy25
11-18-2014, 01:01 AM
Why are there so many grammar errors in the NBA forum?

There, their, they're that hard to know?



Any way, I watched that game, that was an insane come back.

That said, I haven't seen anything that shows he touched the in-bound pass.


Either way, I doubt they overturn anything.

Jeffy25
11-18-2014, 01:02 AM
Are they going to get more camera angles or the same ones that they used on replay ? I'm sure in replay they determined the ball didn't touch Hollins hand and the basket was good.


Correct

MrfadeawayJB
11-18-2014, 01:07 AM
Even if the clock wasn't started at the precise time, lees shot was almost through the nets when the lights flashed

likemystylez
11-18-2014, 03:09 AM
Even if the clock wasn't started at the precise time, lees shot was almost through the nets when the lights flashed

ummmmm.....solid argument man :crazy:

king4day
11-18-2014, 09:33 AM
i agree that every team has been screwed BUT isnt that the reason for the replay system, to avoid mistakes like this?

here is a link for proof as to why they got the call wrong

http://uproxx.com/sports/2014/11/the-grizzlies-buzzer-beater-should-not-have-counted-and-heres-why/

That article is what makes me think it won't be overturned. There's not a wide enough gap between him touching the ball and putting it up (in tenths of seconds) that can allow the officiating to overrule it now. It's too close and if there's not enough evidence, you can't overturn it.

king4day
11-18-2014, 09:35 AM
Even if the clock wasn't started at the precise time, lees shot was almost through the nets when the lights flashed

From an unbiased standpoint, this is what I saw too. The ball was released with .2 left. If they start it on time, it's a whole lot closer, but I believe it would be under .1 with the ball out before the lights go red.
Not enough evidence to overturn. Officials can't assume it wouldn't have been released in time.

likemystylez
11-18-2014, 10:42 AM
That article is what makes me think it won't be overturned. There's not a wide enough gap between him touching the ball and putting it up (in tenths of seconds) that can allow the officiating to overrule it now. It's too close and if there's not enough evidence, you can't overturn it.

the more compelling argument in the article is that it was tipped on the inbound (in which case the clock should have started as soon as ryan hollins made contact with it)... but when you combine that with the clock starting a fraction of a second late- theres no way it got off in time.

If they can get some footage where they can definitively prove it was tipped- I think adam silver has to overturn the call. He has always said is that the most important thing is that they get it right (even if it takes an extra 7-10 days). But if thats just lip service and his real goal is to make sure the kings lose- then he will opt not to overturn it

likemystylez
11-18-2014, 10:45 AM
The refs just missed it, play went on and the crazy tip in by Lee was good. Game over. It sucks but it happens

well- that doesnt seem like a very proactive way of "getting it right"- LOL thats sort of accepting failure. Also Adam silver has said he wants transparency. If he sees that the ball touched ryan hollins on some frame by frame replay- the clock has to start from that point.

likemystylez
11-18-2014, 10:46 AM
no, that shot shouldn't have counted. But there is no way on earth the league opens a can of worms by changing that.

LOL so much for them saying that the most important thing is getting it right.

likemystylez
11-18-2014, 10:50 AM
well then the only way is that the Kings have clear evidence that Hollins tipped the ball. its only one game and this shouldnt be a discussion but oh well

its not a matter of the game, its a matter of the nba doing whats necesary to get the call right (if they can prove ryan hollins touched it)

i'myourdaddy
11-18-2014, 10:54 AM
http://www.sactownroyalty.com/2014/11/14/7219273/ball-dont-lie-the-ball-says-hollins-tipped-me

Here is another article that clearly show the ball change rotation aka tip by Hollins.

likemystylez
11-18-2014, 11:04 AM
solid argument

MrfadeawayJB
11-18-2014, 12:49 PM
http://www.sactownroyalty.com/2014/11/14/7219273/ball-dont-lie-the-ball-says-hollins-tipped-me

Here is another article that clearly show the ball change rotation aka tip by Hollins.


There is not a frame in that article that proves Hollins touched the ball. They need definite video evidence to overturn the call. At no point did video show Hollins touch the ball. That article focused on ball rotation, however that can be caused by a variety of things including Carter's release of the ball.

Sactown
11-18-2014, 02:34 PM
There is not a frame in that article that proves Hollins touched the ball. They need definite video evidence to overturn the call. At no point did video show Hollins touch the ball. That article focused on ball rotation, however that can be caused by a variety of things including Carter's release of the ball.

Yeah not that surprising, but there is a picture showing the trajectory of the ball and it drastically changes when passing hollins hand so I wouldn't be surprised if this goes either way

king4day
11-18-2014, 02:41 PM
the more compelling argument in the article is that it was tipped on the inbound (in which case the clock should have started as soon as ryan hollins made contact with it)... but when you combine that with the clock starting a fraction of a second late- theres no way it got off in time.

If they can get some footage where they can definitively prove it was tipped- I think adam silver has to overturn the call. He has always said is that the most important thing is that they get it right (even if it takes an extra 7-10 days). But if thats just lip service and his real goal is to make sure the kings lose- then he will opt not to overturn it

If it was tipped, then no question it has to be overturned. Time would have run out before Lee would have grabbed it probably.

nastynice
11-18-2014, 03:18 PM
There is not a frame in that article that proves Hollins touched the ball. They need definite video evidence to overturn the call. At no point did video show Hollins touch the ball. That article focused on ball rotation, however that can be caused by a variety of things including Carter's release of the ball.

x2. Its very close, maybe my computer sucks, or doesn't have HD or something, but the only spot where I can actually tell the ball's rotation is that part where they broke it down in separate videos, and to be honest I don't see enough difference to tell wether or not it truly did change rotation.

ThuglifeJ
11-18-2014, 03:29 PM
Am I blind? I see nothing that makes it look like Hollins tipped it? It looks like it was just passed that way...from every angle.

I don't think Lee was capable of getting that shot off in .3 but the time keepers have reaction times, I'd give Lee the benefit of the doubt


.3 long enough? No. Did hollins tip it? Really don't think so or understand that hype.

PhillyFaninLA
11-18-2014, 03:36 PM
I don't think so, I also think its weak to ask. You don't win or lose on any one play. They had 48 minutes to win and not need that one play.

Miltstar
11-18-2014, 03:40 PM
The Grizzlies should go back and find where the refs wrongfully ran the clock for .5 seconds after a whistle

Wrigheyes4MVP
11-18-2014, 03:43 PM
Any team would do the same as the Kings. The only thing to lose is $10,000 which is nothing to the Kings.

Goose17
11-18-2014, 04:23 PM
If it was a playoff game they might have done something but I don't see the league doing anything for a very early regular season game.

Chronz
11-18-2014, 04:44 PM
Cmon now, act like you've been to the playoffs before Sacramento.

MrfadeawayJB
11-18-2014, 05:11 PM
I will say this: it's going to be very hard to overturn this because the refs did review it for like 5 mins during the game. Clear evidence of the contrary is needed to overturn the call. With all that said, I hope the kings don't let the outcome of an early season game affect them. They got a great young team and will win their share of games this season.

billy17
11-18-2014, 10:06 PM
Being as unbiased as I can be:

The trajectory changes past Hollins. Its seems to die off a bit and I think we can all agree Carter probably wasnt trying to throw it to the left of the rim and short. Ive also read that people have broken it down frame by frame (and im sure Vivek has this in his "evidence"), showing that Lee had the ball in his hands for about .43 seconds. Thats enough to convince me, but im not too optimistic that theyll overturn it.

I dont blame the Kings for pursuing this. The organization is doing everything they can to move in the right direction and have success. If you think you can change a loss to a win, you pursue it.

kingsdelez24
11-18-2014, 10:11 PM
Cmon now, act like you've been to the playoffs before Sacramento.

Maybe one day we'll get a top 3 player due to "basketball reasons" too

likemystylez
11-18-2014, 11:24 PM
I don't think so, I also think its weak to ask. You don't win or lose on any one play. They had 48 minutes to win and not need that one play.

LOL well then the griz should have no problem with just reversing the call on that one play

likemystylez
11-18-2014, 11:27 PM
If it was a playoff game they might have done something but I don't see the league doing anything for a very early regular season game.

if the league was telling the truth about really wanting to get it right- I have no idea what difference it makes whether the game is in the first 2 weeks or in the nba finals

Goose17
11-19-2014, 06:58 AM
if the league was telling the truth about really wanting to get it right- I have no idea what difference it makes whether the game is in the first 2 weeks or in the nba finals

Because these games are pretty irrelevant. The first quarter of the regular season is just teams finding their footing more than anything else. Aside from Sacramento fans I doubt anyone really cares that much.

A playoff game would get more attention and is obviously more important. Completely different situations.

Have they never heard of what boxers say? Don't let it go to the judges.

Right or not it's the way it is.

likemystylez
11-19-2014, 06:44 PM
Because these games are pretty irrelevant. The first quarter of the regular season is just teams finding their footing more than anything else. Aside from Sacramento fans I doubt anyone really cares that much.

A playoff game would get more attention and is obviously more important. Completely different situations.

Have they never heard of what boxers say? Don't let it go to the judges.

Right or not it's the way it is.

well if thats the way it is- they shouldnt act like they care about getting to the truth... I guess they care in some games and not other games?

Goose17
11-19-2014, 06:49 PM
well if thats the way it is- they shouldnt act like they care about getting to the truth... I guess they care in some games and not other games?

Well of course they're going to act like they do. They're not stupid.