I want to go back to Donovan's waived off three from the first Pelicans game
- Thread starter infection
- Start date
vegas
Well-Known Member
The refs were the least of the problems in that game.
Sent from my SM-G965U1 using JazzFanz mobile app
Sent from my SM-G965U1 using JazzFanz mobile app
I don't see it as a zero-sum game. This game was definitely there for us to win and we put ourselves in that situation. However, I don't think acknowledging one variable means that it's the only variable and that the others don't exist, nor do I think acknowledging one variable means that it has to be the biggest one in the equation. I get what you are saying about it being irrational to believe that the call was made on Mitchell's shot and how complaining about refs makes people irrational, but go back and watch that sequence. Pretend that Donovan missed the shot and there was no foul called. Now pretend I was trying to make the argument that Gobert got fouled and should have gone to the line. Would that be rational at all? Nobody in their right mind would have called that a foul and we're only allowing it in hindsight because that's what they did. I'd presume you'd think complaining about the refs had deranged my brain into thinking Rudy got fouled.
The first would be that the whistle came well enough after the contact, the second would be that he wasn't the official with the angle on that call -- the baseline official who inbounded was, the third is that he raised his arm up indicating a personal foul and counted the basket. He did not use the correct hand signals for pushing or for holding, which would have been the call had it been called on Rudy. He instead held up the personal foul signal, followed by a continuation indication.
I really don't believe you'd ever see a circumstance where that foul is called at all. If that call is made, it's almost exclusively against Rudy,
Yes.
This is one hesitation I have with making a thread like this. I have plenty of complaints about the team, and it's not one-or-the-other, and it doesn't mean that I think the whole game hinged on one call. But just like the players themselves can totally screw things up in the clutch, so too can the officials.
I don't think it's irrational to say that Gobert got fouled. Me personally, I don't think that should be a call on either player. But there was definitely contact made between the two players. After watching it a few times more, it actually looks like Jones wraps up Gobert with both arms and tries to flop/intentionally make contact. The last two minute report calls states this as a correct foul on Jones because he he wrapped his arm around Gobert and yanked him. I didn't even notice his left arm until I read the report but I can see it now. I wouldn't have called it given the time/situation, but it's probably a foul on Jones by the book.
I do think it's irrational to think that they called on Mitchell's shot, called a review out of the blue, and then changed what they initially called so could change it....Obviously they blew the whistle on the contract between Jones and Gobert and then reviewed it to see if it happened before or after the shot. I think the alternate explanation of event's is irrational.
jazzfan1971
Well-Known Member
meh. I don't think that call should have been the difference in the game. Jazz should have been winning by 20 when the bad call happened.
We talk about so many things that aren’t the difference in a game, I don’t understand why the assumption ends up being there that if something like this is brought up that it equates to saying it’s the difference in a game. My argument is purely protocol. Can they do _____. Did they do _____. I get that some people believe the official without an angle called a defensive foul on Gobert way before the action but still ruled a good basket on the floor. The question is what foul was originally called. If he called the foul on Gobert, they can review sequence. My belief is that he made an atrociously terrible call and the baseline official motioned to him for review.
But hey, I’ll instead give the statements that would be more consistent with the assumptions being made from asking such question:
OMG guys teh refs!!!1 we win game but refs
Jazz won game cuz tehy work play hard!! But refs cheat OMG!!! Jazz never lose game only Donald stern from beyond the grave put the hex on ref¿
1. This was bang bang. Ref called the foul within a second
2. Ref didn't have the angle? No way the ref on the baseline sees this. Your argument is thin
The continuation signal is made whenever the foul takes place while the shooter is in a shooting motion, whether it is on ball or off ball.
Ref is clearly looking right at Gobert being fouled.
There is no evidence that he was calling a foul against Mitchell when nobody is within 5 feet of him,
Yes. The arm up is universal for all personal fouls. What follows is just the type of personal foul and this part is highly variable and subjective.