Actually I think you're 100% spot on - the ball isn't inbounds until Gordon touches it - was he fouled before touching it? I'd say he WAS, but they realized that might totally kill the game, so just gave 2 free throws?
I'm pretty sure the technical foul situation is the foul occurs before the ball leaves the inbounders hands. I'm just saying that maybe they called for a review for who knocked it out, since the closest ref didn't call a foul. Then when the other ref said he called a foul, they might have decided to go ahead and review it for other things, one of which could be a technical foul. [edit] or who should be awarded the free throws...per tweet above...lulz
lulz, doesn't look to me like the ref under the basket called a foul. And the 3rd ref was way on the other end of the court. Who called the foul? And the NBA Official tweet above makes no sense, unless they are saying maybe Harden got fouled away from the play. All the comments in the tweet are pissed, like, "BS, who called the foul then." "y'all just changed it in review." The tweet should have gone with my reason, "Checking to see if foul occurred prior to inbounds pass. Ruling: Foul after inbounds. No technical foul. 2 Shots for Gordon." That's better cover for taking bribe money from Tilman.
They posted this on tweeter. Live game I didn’t see him call it. But if you watch the video above after looking at this picture, you can see the ref did call a foul. Btw you can see Hill leaned and push off Gordon on his back with his left hand and try to poke the ball with his right. They barely call fouls like that but it is still a foul. Imo Also check the video when the refs are talking. You can clearly see the ref that called the foul explain that hill pushed Gordon from the back. No controversy. I do wish they could call fouls after reviewing a play. A lot of times a foul causes the player to lose the ball. So if the ref hadn’t called a foul it would have been SAC’s ball lol I mean King’s ball. Hehe
Note: Who should be shooting Foul Shots is a bogus reason they gave in their official tweet. That's still bs reason to review. Something was up. Yeah, I was going to post him raising his hand too. But talked myself out of it. You do that to stop the clock, too. Technically, I think closed fist is stop clock for foul, and open is stop clock. His final action is to point Kings possession along with his partner sideline ref. I guess they'll say he was raising hand to call foul, not just join in stopping the clock. But Hill basically walks right by the ref, and no signaling him for a foul further. Rewatching the video he raises his hand to stop clock, then points to either Hill or to his crew member ref (which they do to ask the other to make the out-of-bounds call), then they both point to Kings possession together. Sure, he could be pointing to Hill for a foul But here he is pointing possession as his final call, not continuing to walk to Hill. So I just think the endline ref is just blowing dead ball with him (all of them can stop clock), and then looking for the call from his partner. Here's the uncropped version of your photo when he raises his hand...sideline ref has already making a call.
Yep, could be. But that just gets us back to "Why go to review." it's just weird to me. One ref might have called a foul, but they both point Kings possession. The endline ref doesn't continue to make the foul call as Hill walks towards him. Then they decide to go to review to check who should be shooting fouls, Gordon or Some Mystery Rocket. lulz
uh oh ryan anderson looks fantastic with 10pts on 2-7 shooting. ryan extremists have completely lost it watch yourselves or they'll be watching you through a sniper scope.
@heypartner open hand is the stop clock signal (and for any non foul violation) Closed fist only for a foul call. So the guy definitely called a foul. Official reason to check who was shooting fts?? Lolllz - would have taken 1 look to see it was Gordon. Not 2 minutes...
Didn't Bull say that the ref (baseline, I think) called a foul and the other called out of bounds? I recall Bull saying something about a jersey pull.
He had his arm on EG's back. The referee that was standing behind the play immediately called the foul. The broadcast team missed it but I saw it clear as day. He had his arm up and called a foul. Not sure what the issue is.. if anything the replay confirmed what was called on the floor...a foul.
You're right. There should be no fuss since the foul was called. My only issue is the reason for the Replay is bogus. So saying "if anything the replay confirmed what was called on the floor" is a slippery slop of using replay to make or confirm a foul call. I hope it was all a mistake, and the crew chief accidentally called for a review on the sideline call of out-of-bounds, then they were embarrassed when the baseline ref insisted on his initial foul call....so they made up the bogus excuse. Why not just say, "Foul on the floor" no review being made. The foul was called *and* a review was made....see the bogus reason given in the NBA Official tweet.
I just want to see the right call being made, and if replay shows something the refs missed, then why not use it as long it doesn't significantly impact the flow of the game?
