For the people who think the call was correct

[VengefulAngel]

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

Watch the whole video.

[mistergreens]

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

Watch the whole video.

Great breakdown. How anyone can say the replay review was INCONCLUSIVE is ridiculous :wtf:

And there was NO foul on Barnes - the ball is considered part of the hand when in contact! And, even if you hit the hand touching the ball and it goes out of bounds, it does't apply becasue it went off Jackson's off hand, not the hand touching the ball.

[VengefulAngel]

Great breakdown. How anyone can say the replay review was INCONCLUSIVE is ridiculous :wtf:

And there was NO foul on Barnes - the ball is considered part of the hand when in contact! And, even if you hit the hand touching the ball and it goes out of bounds, it does't apply becasue it went off Jackson's off hand, not the hand touching the ball.

The fact that people don't believe that game was rigged/the refs cost clippers the game is ridiculous.

[iznogood]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BnkfFTrIMAEzJtv.png
If the highlighted part really is the rule we are talking about, then the ruling is correct in my opinion. Jackson's hand was in touch with the ball and the contact caused the ball to go out of bounds and this is all the rule states.

It doesn't say the rule only applies if the player was hit on the hand which was the last to touch the ball. It all happened in the same motion (Jackson trying to put up a shot), it's not like the ball was hit out of Jackson's hands and he then tried to reach for it, which would cause the ball out of bounds or something similar. This will probably be discussed on Coach Nick's show with Ronnie Nunn, so we'll get a semi-official explanation sooner or later.

[VengefulAngel]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BnkfFTrIMAEzJtv.png
If the highlighted part really is the rule we are talking about, then the ruling is correct in my opinion. Jackson's hand was in touch with the ball and the contact caused the ball to go out of bounds and this is all the rule states.

It doesn't say the rule only applies if the player was hit on the hand which was the last to touch the ball. It all happened in the same motion (Jackson trying to put up a shot), it's not like the ball was hit out of Jackson's hands and he then tried to reach for it, which would cause the ball out of bounds or something similar. This will probably be discussed on Coach Nick's show with Ronnie Nunn, so we'll get a semi-official explanation sooner or later.

The rule seems ridiculous and doesn't seem to apply here.

[Magic731]

Great breakdown. How anyone can say the replay review was INCONCLUSIVE is ridiculous :wtf:

And there was NO foul on Barnes - the ball is considered part of the hand when in contact! And, even if you hit the hand touching the ball and it goes out of bounds, it does't apply becasue it went off Jackson's off hand, not the hand touching the ball.
Even Doc himself admitted there was a foul on Barnes.:facepalm
Barnes hits Jackson's hand after the ball has left it.

[gts]

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

Watch the whole video.

CP3 says thank you for drawing attention away from my choking under pressure by making 3 bone heads plays in a row as we coughed up a 13 point lead

[VengefulAngel]

CP3 says thank you for drawing attention away from my choking under pressure by making 3 bone heads plays in a row as we coughed up a 13 point lead

Kevin Durant thanks Russell Westbrook for saving him again...

[guy]

Great breakdown. How anyone can say the replay review was INCONCLUSIVE is ridiculous :wtf:

And there was NO foul on Barnes - the ball is considered part of the hand when in contact! And, even if you hit the hand touching the ball and it goes out of bounds, it does't apply becasue it went off Jackson's off hand, not the hand touching the ball.

I don't understand this. What are you saying? That you can slap someone's hand while the ball is in that hand? How is that not a foul?????

[ZenMaster]

I don't understand this. What are you saying? That you can slap someone's hand while the ball is in that hand? How is that not a foul?????

The hand above the wrist is considered part of the ball.

[iznogood]

The rule seems ridiculous and doesn't seem to apply here.
It may seem ridiculous to you, but I don't see why it shouldn't apply here.

[ZenMaster]

It may seem ridiculous to you, but I don't see why it shouldn't apply here.

The ball had to go towards the right sideline if the rule is to apply, it didn't because Jackson nuged it towards the baseline with his right hand.

[~primetime~]

they got the call wrong and we can all expect an apology statement from the NBA soon...as though that fixes things

[iznogood]

The ball had to go towards the right sideline if the rule is to apply, it didn't because Jackson nuged it towards the baseline with his right hand.
I don't understand this, the rule doesn't say anything about the sidelines or baselines..?

[MavsPoke]

Reggie was fouled, ball went out of bounds. OKC ball instead of a foul call.

This happens half a dozen times in every NBA game. Are you people new?

[chocolatethunder]

The hand above the wrist is considered part of the ball.
Which part of the hand extends below the wrist?

[Jlamb47]

Kevin Durant thanks Russell Westbrook for saving him again...

Kd had 10 points in the last 31/2 minutes
STFU

[yobore]

As bad as that call was given the clippers previous encouter with it, the worst call of the game was the clear path which they also reviewed and screwed up

[Blue&Orange]

The ball had to go towards the right sideline if the rule is to apply, it didn't because Jackson nuged it towards the baseline with his right hand.
can you share some literature about that rule? lol this shit is ridiculous.

The rule is clear if you hit someone on the hand and the ball goes off bound, team with possession keeps it.


Why do idiots keep coming up with fiction, "oh but it's only if you are getting a rebound" "oh but it's onyl if it goes towards the right sideline"

Yo mutha****er can i get a quote from the rule book saying that is only when it goes towards the right sideline??

[Blue&Orange]

Which part of the hand extends below the wrist?
:roll:

[VengefulAngel]

Kd had 10 points in the last 31/2 minutes
STFU

6-22... :roll: :roll:

[ZenMaster]

I don't understand this, the rule doesn't say anything about the sidelines or baselines..?

Barnes(from his angle) swipes from right to left, so if he hit Jacksons left hand causing the ball to go out of bounds it would have had to go towards the sideline, but because Jacksons other hand was still touching the ball after Barnes swiped at it the ball went towards the baseline. Hence why Jackson touched it last.


Which part of the hand extends below the wrist?

Exactly.

[funnystuff]

I don't understand this. What are you saying? That you can slap someone's hand while the ball is in that hand? How is that not a foul?????
You cannot base a replay off of who got fouled. Those 2 minute replays are only for determining who it touched last, which is so obviously off Jacksons right arm, the arm Barnes never touched.


Barnes never even touched the ball. :lol

[iznogood]

Barnes(from his angle) swipes from right to left, so if he hit Jacksons left hand causing the ball to go out of bounds it would have had to go towards the sideline, but because Jacksons other hand was still touching the ball after Barnes swiped at it the ball went towards the baseline. Hence why Jackson touched it last.

I think you're looking at this too narrow. Jackson's move was one single motion and Barnes' sweep disrupted it. I don't think you can just break it down into separate parts, except if Jackson was to loose and then regain the possession of the ball, which did not happen.

[ZenMaster]

I think you're looking at this too narrow. Jackson's move was one single motion and Barnes' sweep disrupted it. I don't think you can just break it down into separate parts, except if Jackson was to loose and then regain the possession of the ball, which did not happen.

I'm not and I'm 100% sure I'm not, you are using the rule too literally.

Let me ask you this: if I'm guarding you while you're dribbling with your right hand and i hit you on the back of your right hand while it has contact with the ball and it goes down on your left shin and out, is it yours or my ball?
The way you're intepreting the rule it would make it your ball.

The way that part of the rule is used would be like this: if you're dribbling with your right hand and I hit you on the back of your right hand while in contact with the ball causing it to go directly out of bounds. In reality it was you who touched the ball last, but the momentum of my hit on your hand(which is part of the ball) is what caused it to go out.
Same thing for rebounds, a defender goes up to snatch it but an offensive player from behind hits your hand causing the ball to slip out on the baseline. Technically the defender last touches it but it is the momentum of the hit on the hand that causes it to go out.

[pegasus]

Didn't Jackson foul CP on the last play? It looked like he hit his arm and that's why CP lost the ball.

[YouGotServed]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BnkfFTrIMAEzJtv.png
If the highlighted part really is the rule we are talking about, then the ruling is correct in my opinion. Jackson's hand was in touch with the ball and the contact caused the ball to go out of bounds and this is all the rule states.

It doesn't say the rule only applies if the player was hit on the hand which was the last to touch the ball. It all happened in the same motion (Jackson trying to put up a shot), it's not like the ball was hit out of Jackson's hands and he then tried to reach for it, which would cause the ball out of bounds or something similar. This will probably be discussed on Coach Nick's show with Ronnie Nunn, so we'll get a semi-official explanation sooner or later.

im pretty sure this rule only applies to live action calls. refs were looking at a replay, so this rule doesn't apply. under the replay system they can only use the replays to see who touched the ball last.

Paul choked, but yesterday's out of bounds call was one of the most blatant screw ups by the refs I've ever seen. everyone knows Reggie touched it last. if you disagree you're just playing devil's advocate.

[Jlamb47]

6-22... :roll: :roll:



bad game he made up for coming big when it mattered
Lebron would of choked and mentally broke down

[iznogood]

Let me ask you this: if I'm guarding you while you're dribbling with your right hand and i hit you on the back of your right hand while it has contact with the ball and it goes down on your left shin and out, is it yours or my ball?
The way you're intepreting the rule it would make it your ball.

I don't think this situation is the same. Jackson was holding the ball before the contact with his right hand as well and he was moving toward the basket with the ball, so it's normal for the ball to continue going forward after his lay up attempt is disrupted.

[ZenMaster]

I don't think this situation is the same. Jackson was holding the ball before the contact with his right hand as well and he was moving toward the basket with the ball, so it's normal for the ball to continue going forward after his lay up attempt is disrupted.

It's not the same but the way you are arguing the rule it should also apply in my example.

Now, could the refs have given OKC the ball because they say their missed foul? They probably did, but the problem with that is the same thing happened in a Clipper-Warriors game and the refs there decided to still give the Warriors the ball. So you have one reffing crew giving make up calls on replays while another doesn't, that is a farce.

[guy]

The hand above the wrist is considered part of the ball.

So you can slap someone's hand while they have the ball in their hand is what you're saying. I find it hard to believe.

[ZenMaster]

So you can slap someone's hand while they have the ball in their hand is what you're saying. I find it hard to believe.


[QUOTE]The hand is considered

[guy]

You cannot base a replay off of who got fouled. Those 2 minute replays are only for determining who it touched last, which is so obviously off Jacksons right arm, the arm Barnes never touched.


Barnes never even touched the ball. :lol

Totally understand that. And based off that, the Clippers got screwed. But if they called the foul in the first place, it would've been OKC's ball. You can argue it was basically two wrongs that made a right. But you can also argue that its not right to make a wrong call because of another wrong call that was made. I understand both points of view. Ultimately, after missing the foul, whoever didn't get the ball was going to get screwed. If the Thunder didn't get the ball, everyone would be complaining that they should've called a foul. What they need to do is change the replay rules to allow for foul calls when reviewing out of bounds plays.

[guy]

http://www.nba.com/features/misunderstoodrules_051128.html

This seems very confusing. I know I've seen plays like that a million times and they're usually called as fouls. There's clearly some misinterpretation on one side or the other.

But either way, if thats the correct interpretation, like I said, you can slap someone's hand while they have the ball in their hand.

[iznogood]

It's not the same but the way you are arguing the rule it should also apply in my example.
Why, if you just admitted the situation is not the same?


Now, could the refs have given OKC the ball because they say their missed foul? They probably did, but the problem with that is the same thing happened in a Clipper-Warriors game and the refs there decided to still give the Warriors the ball. So you have one reffing crew giving make up calls on replays while another doesn't, that is a farce.
To be honest, I do not remember the call from the Clippers - Warriors game, I'd like to see it though. But still the fact is that different reffs will sometimes call similar situations differently. You can't call that a farce, that's the nature of basketball. You can not predict every possible situation and include them in the rules.

[ZenMaster]

Why, if you just admitted the situation is not the same?


To be honest, I do not remember the call from the Clippers - Warriors game, I'd like to see it though. But still the fact is that different reffs will sometimes call similar situations differently. You can't call that a farce, that's the nature of basketball. You can not predict every possible situation and include them in the rules.

If you use your argument on my example it still comes out to your ball, that's why I say you're using it too literally.


It's not the nature of basketball when we're talking replay make up calls and one reffing crew does the make up call while the other doesn't. You'll only understand this though if you believe the ball was off Jackson after he was fouled. It's decision made by the refs to make up for the mistake they made or not to, it has to be consistent though.

Here is the foul they missed in the Clips-Warriors game, gave the ball to the Warriors because it was clear Paul was the last to touch it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBd51P533FE

[iznogood]

If you use your argument on my example it still comes out to your ball, that's why I say you're using it too literally.[QUOTE]
I don't think this rule is applicable in this situation, I think that in your case you have two separate things happening (me being hit on the back of the hand and then a "kick" ball), and unfortunately the second one caused me to loose the ball. But I see Jackson's layup attempt as one motion, which was disrupted and he lost the ball. If he lost contact with the ball and then pushed it out in an attempt to gain control, then it should've been Clippers' ball.

[QUOTE]It's not the nature of basketball when we're talking replay make up calls and one reffing crew does the make up call while the other doesn't. You'll only understand this though if you believe the ball was off Jackson after he was fouled. It's decision made by the refs to make up for the mistake they made or not to, it has to be consistent though.

Here is the foul they missed in the Clips-Warriors game, gave the ball to the Warriors because it was clear Paul was the last to touch it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBd51P533FE
I can only see Green touching Chris Paul's non dribbling arm before he touched the ball and I wouldn't even call that a foul. I don't think those situations are the same and I don't think the rule we're discussing should apply in this situation since I don't think Green touched Paul's dribbling arm.
If the OKC decision was really made as a make up call and the rule we're discussing is not applicable, then the refs were definitely wrong. But I don't see these situations similar.

[ZenMaster]

[QUOTE=ZenMaster]If you use your argument on my example it still comes out to your ball, that's why I say you're using it too literally.[QUOTE]
I don't think this rule is applicable in this situation, I think that in your case you have two separate things happening (me being hit on the back of the hand and then a "kick" ball), and unfortunately the second one caused me to loose the ball. But I see Jackson's layup attempt as one motion, which was disrupted and he lost the ball. If he lost contact with the ball and then pushed it out in an attempt to gain control, then it should've been Clippers' ball.


I can only see Green touching Chris Paul's non dribbling arm before he touched the ball and I wouldn't even call that a foul. I don't think those situations are the same and I don't think the rule we're discussing should apply in this situation since I don't think Green touched Paul's dribbling arm.
If the OKC decision was really made as a make up call and the rule we're discussing is not applicable, then the refs were definitely wrong. But I don't see these situations similar.

It's not a kick ball unless you kick it, could have hit any other part of your body and the argument would have been the same. In the case of this game it hit Jacksons right hand.

The rule we are discussing have nothing to do with the Clips-Warriors call as it's not the same call, and even if you don't want to call that situation a foul the NBA did in a statement after the game saying the refs blew that call.
But just like the OKC-Clips game the refs went to the replay with a chance to see the foul and give the make up call to Paul by giving Clippers the ball, but they didn't.
That's when I say it's a farce to give a make up call in one instance and not in another. The NBA knew this situation could happen when they chose for the refs not being able to call a foul on replays.
The refs decision process on replays simply has to be the same or else the integrity of the game comes into question.

[NumberSix]

can you share some literature about that rule? lol this shit is ridiculous.

The rule is clear if you hit someone on the hand and the ball goes off bound, team with possession keeps it.


Why do idiots keep coming up with fiction, "oh but it's only if you are getting a rebound" "oh but it's onyl if it goes towards the right sideline"

Yo mutha****er can i get a quote from the rule book saying that is only when it goes towards the right sideline??
Yes, but the crazy thing about humans is that they have 2 hands. After Barnes hit Jackson's hand, it DIDNT go out of bounds. It touched his OTHER hand and then went out of bounds :hammerhead:


Hey, IDIOT. He's not talking about the sidelines as if that is some sort of rule, idiot. He said Barnes hit the ball in THAT direction! IDIOT. :hammerhead: the ball then changed trajectory from going towards the sideline to then going to the baseline, idiot. :hammerhead:

[Solefade]

Yes, but the crazy thing about humans is that they have 2 hands. After Barnes hit Jackson's hand, it DIDNT go out of bounds. It touched his OTHER hand and then went out of bounds :hammerhead:


Hey, IDIOT. He's not talking about the sidelines as if that is some sort of rule, idiot. He said Barnes hit the ball in THAT direction! IDIOT. :hammerhead: the ball then changed trajectory from going towards the sideline to then going to the baseline, idiot. :hammerhead:


dat ether :roll:

[Rake2204]

http://www.nba.com/features/misunderstoodrules_051128.htmlI think the key there, in terms of interpretation, is the phrase "incidental contact". In basketball, that seems to mean that if a defensive player attempts a steal and happens to brush the hand a little, it can be rendered incidental and not worthy of a foul.

On the other side, if a defensive player flat out karate chops a player's hand while it's in contact with the ball, I think that is no longer deemed "incidental contact". That's illegal contact. The same holds true on a jump shot. If there's is secondary contact that sort of just slips in there, in terms of hand-to-hand touching, it can often be deemed incidental. But again, if a player pimp slaps the entire top side of a shooter's hand, a foul is still capable of being whistled.

Often, I see some folks (not you, Zen) stating "Hand's a part of the ball" as if anything can be done to that hand at any time. I do not believe this is the case.

In fact, I don't know if these episodes are archived, but I think that NBATV "You Make the Call" show touched on this aspect some time this year.

[ZenMaster]

I think the key there, in terms of interpretation, is the phrase "incidental contact". In basketball, that seems to mean that if a defensive player attempts a steal and happens to brush the hand a little, it can be rendered incidental and not worthy of a foul.

On the other side, if a defensive player flat out karate chops a player's hand while it's in contact with the ball, I think that is no longer deemed "incidental contact". That's illegal contact. The same holds true on a jump shot. If there's is secondary contact that sort of just slips in there, in terms of hand-to-hand touching, it can often be deemed incidental. But again, if a player pimp slaps the entire top side of a shooter's hand, a foul is still capable of being whistled.

Often, I see some folks (not you, Zen) stating "Hand's a part of the ball" as if anything can be done to that hand at any time. I do not believe this is the case.

In fact, I don't know if these episodes are archived, but I think that NBATV "You Make the Call" show touched on this aspect some time this year.

Hmm I don't know, I always thought the argument was that a defender has a right to make a play anywhere on the ball, and not only 70% of it because the other is covered by hand. Thought that the argument is that it would simply be too hard to play defense.
Works the same though because of you karate chop somebodys hand there as good chance you get wrist as well.

[iznogood]

It's not a kick ball unless you kick it, could have hit any other part of your body and the argument would have been the same. In the case of this game it hit Jacksons right hand.[QUOTE]
It did not hit Jackson's right hand, it was in Jackson's right hand from the beginning.

[QUOTE]The rule we are discussing have nothing to do with the Clips-Warriors call as it's not the same call, and even if you don't want to call that situation a foul the NBA did in a statement after the game saying the refs blew that call.
But just like the OKC-Clips game the refs went to the replay with a chance to see the foul and give the make up call to Paul by giving Clippers the ball, but they didn't.
That's when I say it's a farce to give a make up call in one instance and not in another. The NBA knew this situation could happen when they chose for the refs not being able to call a foul on replays.
The refs decision process on replays simply has to be the same or else the integrity of the game comes into question.
I don't understand what are you trying to say, are you saying all the referees should be strictly making make up calls? Make up calls are always wrong. But it hasn't been established that this was a make up call in the first place.

[Rake2204]

Hmm I don't know, I always thought the argument was that a defender has a right to make a play anywhere on the ball, and not only 70% of it because the other is covered by hand. Thought that the argument is that it would simply be too hard to play defense.
Works the same though because of you karate chop somebodys hand there as good chance you get wrist as well.I can see where you're coming from. I am not a licensed official, so I cannot be completely definitive in what I say either. I can only convey what I felt I've come to understand, though I admit there's a little more grey area in my brain on that regard than I'd like.

I'm not in position to watch these videos at the moment, but I think there could possibly be an explanation in one of these links (perhaps the one titled "Point of Contact: High Five" in Episode #3): http://www.nba.com/official/makingthecall.html

[ZenMaster]

[QUOTE]It's not a kick ball unless you kick it, could have hit any other part of your body and the argument would have been the same. In the case of this game it hit Jacksons right hand.[QUOTE]
It did not hit Jackson's right hand, it was in Jackson's right hand from the beginning.


I don't understand what are you trying to say, are you saying all the referees should be strictly making make up calls? Make up calls are always wrong. But it hasn't been established that this was a make up call in the first place.

That's where we disagree.

And I'm saying you can't have one reffing crew making a make up call on a replay while another crew doesn't.

[ZenMaster]

I can see where you're coming from. I am not a licensed official, so I cannot be completely definitive in what I say either. I can only convey what I felt I've come to understand, though I admit there's a little more grey area in my brain on that regard than I'd like.

I'm not in position to watch these videos at the moment, but I think there could possibly be an explanation in one of these links (perhaps the one titled "Point of Contact: High Five" in Episode #3): http://www.nba.com/official/makingthecall.html

I think an example on the "too hard part" would be that on many blocks they get part of the hand.

Either way it comes out to hand being part of the ball.

[iznogood]

That's where we disagree.
I guess at this point we'll have to agree to disagree.


And I'm saying you can't have one reffing crew making a make up call on a replay while another crew doesn't.
I agree. I hate make up calls, two wrongs doesn't make right.

[KNOW1EDGE]

Barnes fouled the sh1t out of him.

The call on the floor was out on Clips, OKC ball.

There was not enough video evidence to over-turn the call.

Refs made the right call.

Doc needs to quit b1tching and start coaching. Your team was up 7 with less than 50 seconds to go.

If the Clippers were better at basketball they would have won, cant blame the refs.

[Threethrows]

Barnes fouled the sh1t out of him.
Not relevant to the replay. Teams get screwed all the time because of this. They get fouled and the ball goes out. Play gets reviewed which clearly shows a foul. Foul is ignored. They only look at who touched it last.


The call on the floor was out on Clips, OKC ball.
Yes



There was not enough video evidence to over-turn the call.
There definitely was. The ball went off of Reggie's hand. NOT the one that lost the ball in the first place but his other hand. Meaning no matter how the ball ended up in that situation it is off him. You are well within the rules by deflecting the ball off of another player on the opposing team and it will be out on them. And again, the foul is irrelevant when it comes to replay.



Refs made the right call.
No.



Doc needs to quit b1tching and start coaching. Your team was up 7 with less than 50 seconds to go.
Agree with the sentiment but the refs deserve to be called out.


If the Clippers were better at basketball they would have won, cant blame the refs.
You shouldn't, but you can. Sad that it's always such an issue in the first place.