Correct call according to the rulebook

[sd3035]

:cheers:

[Marlo_Stanfield]

reported to the authorities
danger for society

[ImKobe]

PM me for further details

[navy]

The refs told the Clippers that it was off Barnes. Please don't pretend like that was the correct call. It was a makeup call.

[9erempiree]

There was no evidence for a reverse.

If refs aren't sure about it on replay than the call stands.

I thought the refs handled themselves perfectly.

[sd3035]

The rulebook states that if a player is slapped on his hand causing the ball to go out of bounds, his team retains position

consider yourselves educated :cheers:

[fpliii]

It actually might be:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BnkfFTrIMAEzJtv.png

If this is the case, I feel bad for overreacting. I thought the ball touched his other hand before it went out of bounds, though, from the replay.

[MMM]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BnkfFTrIMAEzJtv.png

why do they ignore this during other similar reviews though????

this is only the 2nd time i've seen them get it right with this type of rulling
the other game was a Bulls/Lakers game i think

seems 99% of the time they just look at last touch

[Inferno]

It actually might be:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BnkfFTrIMAEzJtv.png

If this is the case, I feel bad for overreacting. I thought the ball touched his other hand before it went out of bounds, though, from the replay.

Can someone fill me in on what happened down the stretch?

[sd3035]

Can someone fill me in on what happened down the stretch?

Paul choked

[Trollsmasher]

It actually might be:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BnkfFTrIMAEzJtv.png

If this is the case, I feel bad for overreacting. I thought the ball touched his other hand before it went out of bounds, though, from the replay.
does not apply here at all

and the refs apparently don't know about this rule anyway
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BnkpMfIIMAAlebZ.jpg

[nba_55]

Can someone fill me in on what happened down the stretch?

Clippers choked , but
3 straight bad calls in favor of OKC ( one of them was very bad) made OKC win the game.

[navy]

It actually might be:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BnkfFTrIMAEzJtv.png

If this is the case, I feel bad for overreacting. I thought the ball touched his other hand before it went out of bounds, though, from the replay.

We shall see if the nba apologizes or not. This was not the explanation they gave Doc, because Barnes didnt touch the and it went off of.

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

does not apply here at all

and the refs apparently don't know about this rule anyway
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BnkpMfIIMAAlebZ.jpg
It DOES apply which is why OKC WON thru heart, determination and CLUTCH offense and defense:applause: :applause: :applause:

[Inferno]

So the only controversial call is the out of bounds play, right?

[sd3035]

It DOES apply which is why OKC WON thru heart, determination and CLUTCH offense and defense:applause: :applause: :applause:

:applause: :applause: :applause:

[nba_55]

Refs didnt know that rule.

[HoopsFanNumero1]

OP is a moron.

1. The rule is not relevant here
2. The refs did not make the call according to this rule because, once again, the rule is not relevant.

[kamil]

does not apply here at all

and the refs apparently don't know about this rule anyway
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BnkpMfIIMAAlebZ.jpg

Learn to screenshot, noob.

[Inferno]

Can I get a gif of the out of bounds?

[9erempiree]

The rules make sense. So the team with the possession doesn't lose possession because of a missed foul call.

Simple logic.

When rules are put in place, they think about these things. A missed call should not be a penalty against a ball going out of bounds.

We know fouls can't be called during replays, therefore, the rules are in placed as an insurance policy to cover for the missed call.

People just interpret the replay differently.

[Jameerthefear]

it does not apply because it's a replay.

[russwest0]

The refs told the Clippers that it was off Barnes. Please don't pretend like that was the correct call. It was a makeup call.

the refs said there was inconclusive evidence to make ANY CALL.

however upon further review we can see that the correct call was made according to the rulebook. :applause: :applause: :applause:

[ZMonkey11]

Learn to screenshot, noob.

Because you were kind enough to give us this shot yourself. April 2013 at it's finest.

[MMM]

Refs didnt know that rule.

exactly

i've only seen the refs make this rulling

once in all the reviews i've seen, and it has been missed countless other times where it should have been called. There were some possessions in the Lakers/Celtics finals that should have went with this rulling instead they interpret the review strictly with last touch

[nba_55]

it does not apply because it's a replay.

this

[Trollsmasher]

Learn to screenshot, noob.
not screened by me, baldy

just kill yourself, you insecure bald fa*got

baldass

[MMM]

it does not apply because it's a replay.

of course it applies can anyone remember which Chicago game it was when the ref reversed it based on this rule????

I wanna say it was vs. LA in 2010 or 2011
think it was an ABC game

[gts]

the refs said there was inconclusive evidence to make ANY CALL.

however upon further review we can see that the correct call was made according to the rulebook. :applause: :applause: :applause:

the correct call would have been foul on Barnes and two free throws.... that being said they missed that but did get the out of bounds right according to the rules

[Jameerthefear]

of course it applies can anyone remember which Chicago game it was when the ref reversed it based on this rule????

I wanna say it was vs. LA in 2010 or 2011
think it was an ABC game
from my understanding that rule only applies during live game action. during a replay they are looking strictly for who the ball goes off.

[T_L_P]

Barnes hit him on the other hand though, right?

[9erempiree]

the correct call would have been foul on Barnes and two free throws.... that being said they missed that but did get the out of bounds right according to the rules

:applause: I like to applaud the NBA for actually implementing this rule.

[MMM]

from my understanding that rule only applies during live game action. during a replay they are looking strictly for who the ball goes off.

maybe you are right but that it is stupid as ****

it should be off who caused the ball to go out, If the player that has the ball knocked out of his hands makes a 2nd touching motion than it should be last touch.

[kamil]

It DOES apply which is why OKC WON thru heart, determination and CLUTCH offense and defense:applause: :applause: :applause:

No, they won mostly due to Clippers last minute screwups. Thunder getting possession of the ball was potentially a lucky break considering it SHOULD have been a foul.

[9erempiree]

The refs weren't JUST looking to see who touched the ball last.

They were looking to see if the defender caused the offensive player to lose the ball by hitting his hand.

The defender did.

They actually did the right thing considering they missed the foul.

[fpliii]

The refs weren't JUST looking to see who touched the ball last.

They were looking to see if the defender caused the offensive player to lose the ball by hitting his hand.

The defender did.

They actually did the right thing considering they missed the foul.
I agree, but it might've hit his off hand. Since that was inconclusive though, you can't reverse the call.

I guess the end of the game just came off as crazy as it did due to a bunch of close calls, not necessarily bad calls. If CP3 just accepts the intentional instead of getting greedy and going for the shooting foul, the game is over right there.

Not sure why they didn't call the intentional when the Clippers tried to wrap up Ibaka though, 3 seconds left. Wouldn't have made a difference most likely, but a bit weird.

[dbugz]

Barnes hit him on the hand that leads the ball towards Jackson's right hand.

If the ball went directly out of bounds after Barnes hit Jackson on the hand then the rule is valid, but in this case, the ball went straight first to Jackson's right hand before it went out of bounds.

Watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6_6vb7TfZ8

Should have been LAC ball.

[9erempiree]

Barnes hit him on the hand that leads the ball towards Jackson's right hand.

If the ball went directly out of bounds after Barnes hit Jackson on the hand then the rule is valid, but in this case, the ball went straight first to Jackson's right hand before it went out of bounds.

Watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6_6vb7TfZ8

Should have been LAC ball.

Doesn't matter.

Barnes hit him on the hand to cause the ball to become loose.

Those are the rules.

[Micku]

Doesn't matter.

Barnes hit him on the hand to cause the ball to become loose.

Those are the rules.

I remember watching a game with a somewhat similar play. When the player A hit the player B hand, and it went off the same hand, then it's player's B team ball.

In this case, the Barnes hit Jackson's hand/wrist or whatever, the ball went lose and it went off Reggie Jackson off ball hand. If that wasn't a foul, then it should've been Clippers ball, right?

[Inferno]

Doesn't matter.

Barnes hit him on the hand to cause the ball to become loose.

Those are the rules.

Rule No. 12 - Fouls and Penalties
B. - Personal Foul
Section I - Types
e. "Contact which occurs on the hand of an offensive player, while that hand is in contact with the ball, is legal."

[ZenMaster]

It actually might be:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BnkfFTrIMAEzJtv.png

If this is the case, I feel bad for overreacting. I thought the ball touched his other hand before it went out of bounds, though, from the replay.

No that's not right, that part of the rule is for when they're trying to collect a rebound and somebody hits them on the back of the hand forcing the missed catch while the ball goes out of bounds.

Basically for this part of rule to take affect the ball should have gone out on the right sideline.

[VengefulAngel]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dENg8C9d5WQ

Watch that

[longtime lurker]

does not apply here at all

and the refs apparently don't know about this rule anyway
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BnkpMfIIMAAlebZ.jpg

How does it not apply you ****ing moron

[9erempiree]

How does it not apply you ****ing moron
:oldlol:

He can't read and doesn't know the rules.

[-Lebron23-]

That's a rather lax interpretation of the rule. The ball doesn't go directly out of bounds after Barnes swipes it but rather remains on Jackson's right hand for a fraction to then head out of bounds. To me it's Clippers ball, arguable, yes, but Clippers ball.

[9erempiree]

That's a rather lax interpretation of the rule. The ball doesn't go directly out of bounds after Barnes swipes it but rather remains on Jackson's right hand for a fraction to then head out of bounds. To me it's Clippers ball, arguable, yes, but Clippers ball.

Those 2 angles and clips show no signs of it going off Jacksons right hand. It may have if we have multiple angles to show it.

Again, you can't overturn something without proof.

[-Lebron23-]

Those 2 angles and clips show no signs of it going off Jacksons right hand. It may have if we have multiple angles to show it.

Again, you can't overturn something without proof.
It is the impression I get, I am trying to follow the ball's direction to see how it is impacted after the swipe. What happens then is the ball slightly heads sideways but Jackson's right hand ultimately pushes it forward.

I understand if refs say it's not clear enough to change it, it just looks Clippers ball to me.