What is your take on instant replay? The NBA should use videotape replay to determine whether potential game-winning shots beat the buzzer, New Jersey Nets coach Byron Scott said Wednesday. Scott said officials have made the wrong call on game-winning shots in two games in the past month, including Lamond Murray's 3-pointer that beat the Eastern Conference-leading Nets 100-97 on Tuesday night in Cleveland. Murray caught an inbound pass from midcourt in the left corner, squared his shoulders and got off his shot -- all within five-tenths of a second. Replays showed the clock did not start right away on the inbound play. Referees start the clock with a remote wireless system. "That was a big-time error for us to lose the game on that type of an error this late in the season, and with what's at stake for us. That's not good," Scott said before the Nets played the Portland Trail Blazers on Wednesday night. Scott said that officials also blew a call on Jalen Rose's game-winner for Chicago against Houston. A game-winner by Kobe Bryant of the Lakers against Charlotte was judged right. Officials in college basketball games are allowed to look at a replay to determine if a last-second shot beat the buzzer. "If they have a big decision, they should have something they can look at," Scott said. "It should have been a no basket and the game should have gone to overtime." Rod Thorn, the former NBA vice president of basketball operations and the current Nets' president, said the league told him the officials -- Joe Forte, Bennie Adams and Leon Wood -- made a judgment call, and the league supported it. Thorn said the judgment was wrong, and the league should say it. "That's not belittling the referees if the call was definitely wrong," Thorn said. "It's still a judgment. That's not going to change. To me if something was definitely wrong, you say it was. It happens." Even though videotape replay would not have helped the officials since the clock didn't start right away, Thorn said the officials should have known better. "With five-tenths of a second, as a referee you know this can happen and this can happen and that can't happen, because that's the way you are trained," Thorn said. "Sometimes it's a calculated guess. But to me, because of the position he caught the ball, and I have seen these things forever, it was impossible to get the shot off." Thorn said he was not an advocate of instant replays at the end of NBA games, but he is now. Stu Jackson, the league's current vice president of basketball operations, said the officiating crew discussed what would be an acceptable shot before the play. "The crew made a judgment that it was an acceptable attempt," Jackson told Fox Sports. "We understand it was a highly contested game. Things were said in the heat of battle. We are sensitive to these issues. There is not going to be any further action taken."
I think instant replay should be used in NBA games but only at the end of games when buzzer beaters are in question and only if the shot could change the outcome of the game. If a team is up by 20 with 4 seconds left to play there should be no replay at all but if a team is up 2 with 4 seconds left and the trailing team makes a questionable 2 or 3 then there should be a review. I think all Rocket fans would agree after that bull crap Jalen Rose shot.
No instant replay. Your team is down by one, put up a buzzer-beater for the win; everyone in the stands leaps and roars in celebration and starts heading for the aisles to try to beat the traffic out of the parking lot. But, the ref blows his whistle, says they've got to review it, looks at a tiny screen and then announces, "Yes, the shot was taken before time expired; the basket will count!" What do you do? Cheer again? The game ended 2 minutes ago. I need instant gratification, I can't wait for a ref to make an informed decision. He's got to call it like he sees it, immediately. Besides that, if a ref is late in starting the clock on an inbounds play? What good is instant replay going to do him? Is he going to count 0.5 seconds off from when the guy catches the ball watching a replay? What if the clock isn't started promptly on an inbounds play with 30 seconds left but no stoppage in play?
If the clock did not stop properly then you restart it at .5 and run the play again...it would slow the end of the game down a bit...but when a win or loss is concerned with the way the records are so close especially in the West it is vital that if a team did in fact win a game or lose a game that it be called correctly
It definately should be implemented. Think about it ... who gets to call whether or not if it was late shot or if they should let it go? So basically, the referee's determine who the winner is, not the players working their asses off. This is not the usual advantage call ... this is the game!
instead of having 3 refs on the floor running, how about 2 refs on the floor and 1 sitting down in front of a monitor. they can even rotate during the game so as not to get tired from all that running. the monitor ref can overrule the others when it comes to buzzer beaters.
Bad idea. Why? Because instituting instant replay only at the end of games places a false importance on that moment. A bad call midway through the 4th quarter that shifts momentum is every bit, if not more, important than a buzzer beater. We simply remember bad calls at the buzzer more because they're dramatic. And having IR for every play would slow down games too much.
