This is how I feel . Sure, if the play is reviewed on pure technicalities, the Kings may have a case.. but they defended that last play like Grade A doodoo. Sit down, stop whining, and take the deserved regular season loss.
I don't remember but has the NBA ever reversed a W, particularly after extensive video replay review this must have gotten. Even if the Kings were right I think this has to fall into the no clear video replay to overturn the on the court ruling. Chalk up the W for the Grizz.
If lee can't do that in .3 then how the hell did Fisher catch the ball not facing the basket turn, jump, AND follow through against the Spurs in .4 ...Damn hypocrites.
If the defender on the ball tipped it, i better see him throwing a fit that the clock should have started a long time ago. Anyway i hope the NBA actually reverses the win.
Not a tip. He caught it and slung it upward. Doesn't matter what the timekeeper does. It is by definition impossible for such a shot to be made in 0.3 seconds.
as I'm typing this, ADblock is blocking 7 ads. Clutch is way richer than you think. The need to contribute in order to edit is stupid
Exactly... WHY GUARD THE IN-BOUNDS PASSER??? You immediately have a defensive advantage of 5 on 4, and there is no need to guard a single jump shooter, or anybody beyond the 3 point line. There was only one way to get a "tip in" and that was close to the basket.... now I agree this was not really a tip in, but its still inexcusable to not have a single big body camped out in the lane (but have several guys around the 3 point line, defending nothing).
By definition, a "tip" implies that there is no possession of the ball. Lee definitely had possession of it. Since the rule is that is should have been a "tip", I would disallow the basket. All that being said, I'd love to know exactly how long the ball was in Lee's possession before it left his hands. Really close if you ask me. I never have understood why the NBA needs to rely upon the game clock in these situations. Video has 24 or 60 frames per second. Why not just have an application where you select the frame that shows the first touch, and then type in that you want it to move forward 0.3 seconds. If the resulting frame still shows him touching the ball, then disallow the basket. Pretty simple IMO.
And the chances of that happening is what... and even if it possibly happens (as it may have in this case), there's still a chance they don't see it and don't start the clock. At any rate, when the only realistic shot that can beat you is a tip in... and you do want to have somebody guard the inbounds pass... why guard anybody at the 3 point line? At least two Kings defenders are camping out playing defense on the perimeter.... one is trying to tip the in-bounds pass... and two are in the paint (one getting picked, and the other forgetting to switch). It basically became a 3 on 2 game, when it should have been a 4 on 5 game with the defense allowing anything but a tip in at the basket.
Same thing I said to him goes for you. Rich? Off this? Haha. I'm sure he does fine, and if so good for him. Doesn't change anything.
Does the NBA have a rule on this? Logically (eg. round-up), that would show as 0.4 seconds, but maybe the rule isn't a roundup, so as not to imply to the players that there is more time than there really is. That is, the NBA doesn't show 0.39 as 0.4 because that would imply to the players that there is an extra 0.01 seconds... In either case, 0.39 seconds or 0.30 seconds, by rule that shot shouldn't be allowed. But it will be... move on..
Which I agreed with already. But, the NBA rule of what can happen in 0.3 seconds is scientific. I'm saying the tip-in rule is built on clay feet because the way you get into a situation with 0.3 seconds on the clock isn't done with nearly as much rigor as the observations done to come up with the tip-in rule. I'd call it precision without accuracy. I'd be happier with a less precise management of the last fraction of a second to reflect the actual amount of accuracy they have. If you have less than a second on the clock, just be sure to shoot it really quick (which Lee did).
If's don't work that way... If he had 10+ more second to make the shot in time then the play call wouldn't have been and in-bound alley oop.
Spoiler FYI just because someone studies computer engineering doesn't make them an expert on computers or business. There are other costs to running a website so don't jump to conclusions based upon your experience with your friend's website. This site can get hit with some pretty crazy spikes in traffic after a trade, injury, win, etc. What happens then? "Basically, if you spike the server too hard or for too long, you can be suspended for taking the resources from your fellow shared server users. If you don't want this to happen, you need to move to a dedicated server. Depending on the type of plan you have, certain things on your account are indeed unlimited. For example, shared accounts give unlimited disk space and bandwidth. When companies say unlimited, what they mean is that they do not meter or limit you on that item. But just because you can have an unlimited amount of something does not mean it is physically possible to consume an infinite amount. Unlimited does not mean infinite. Similarly, it is not possible to use an infinite amount of the server since there are other limits in place, like how much CPU you can use at one time, how many processes you can have open at one time, how many emails you can send out in an hour, etc. Certain rules are in place to make sure one person does not use the entire server on a shared account, preventing other customers from using the server."
