[Western Conference Semifinals] (2)San Antonio vs. (3)Oklahoma City

Manu gave him enough space, the small part of his foot over the line is therefore a non-issue. Guys pushing away part of the arm before inbounding happens a lot and with Manu's flop movement, I'm glad they did not call that. Then the jump happened. Guys grab people all the time in these situations, but by the time they fouled Durant, something should've been called. The problem by that point is what do you call? Fouls went both ways, though it seems the Spurs got more shafted than the Thunder. It's ironic referees can really kill a game by their constant whistles yet with all these fouls they just let it all go..

 

Panama papers size report

 

no this does not happen a lot. an in bounding player does not extend contact to create space in anyway.

 

Pushing away / slapping away part of an arm / hands does happen, elbow is something else but the flopping makes it worse than it is.

 

nope. i don't know what you've been watching but an in bounder does not make contact with the defense. good luck finding examples that make this so common to you. when you have the whole basketball world in awe at something that does not happen that should tell you enough. Your belief that this happens a lot if just false when it comes to an inbounder. All of that stuff happens outside of that person to players trying to get the ball and defending them.

 

Guess that's just amateur ball then I thought it was really quite common. Webber's reaction to it is priceless regardless :grin:

 

It's often wise to withhold taking a position on these plays until you consult the rules. Ronnie Nunn on twitter actually had to pull out his rule book and tweek his position due to others helping cite rules. But the rules are clear, and it is OK for guys like YOLO to readjust their opinions now:

Rules:

Crossing the plane of the inbounds line is a technical (in last two minutes), by both offense and defense. Ginobody's foot on the line is not actually necessary, but provides concrete proof. He was clearly face-guarding Waiters at the start of the play, and in the photo where his foot on the line as well. You are not allowed to reach over the plane to gets your hands in like that. I do recall seeing a mere crossing the plane with arms called before, just not in last 2 minutes where it's a tech. We just don't take note of it, because it's usually just a delay of game warning.​

So,

1. Ginobody technical for crossing plane of inbounds line (either foot or arms can cause this technical)
2. Waiters later technical for crossing the plane as well -- and/or a foul. Not sure which would take precedence or both apply? Technically, the technical happens first, but nothing in rules to clarify.
3. Waiters violation for jumping on inbounds pass.

All no-calls and Spurs still got the steal and screwed up the play.

 

don't see where any readjustments really need to be made as far as my comments specifically geared toward the in bounder.

 

Hahaha training..how about training to call the obvious. It's not like they didn't see it.

 

Ronnie Nunn also mentioned last night that an inbounder fouling a defender was never in the rules. But he does say the rules can be applied as a technical for Waiters crossing the boundary, regardless if he touches Ginobody or not.

 

Where's the part of the post that says they were told to make sure OKC can extend the series? Lolol (I'm not serious, but..... ever since Tim still have to question it ), such a cluster F with the refs... Lol, anyway great share as usual JR!

 

After the game, lead referee Ken Mauer explained what officials thought happened and what they believe should have been called after reviewing the final seconds. This was the explanation of what should have been called on the final play:

Question: Can you explain what you saw on the inbounds play with 13.5 seconds remaining when Dion Waiters appeared to make contact with Manu Ginobili?

Mauer: On the floor, we did not see a foul on the play. However, upon review we realize and we agree that we should have had an offensive foul on the play. It's a play that we have never seen before, ever, but we feel we should have had an offensive foul on Waiters.

Question: Had an offensive call been made on Waiters, what rule would have applied to a foul committed before throw-in?

Mauer: An offensive foul. Possession Spurs.

 

If you are posting that to explain that it never happens, you don't need to prove that to me. I agree that fouls by the inbounders never happen. Hence, why it isn't even addressed in the rules. If you are posting that to say the Spurs got screwed, well, that's different, and why I said people should consider readjusting their position on Spurs getting screwed until after consulting all the rules.

Nunn said applying the rules means first addressing Gino's actions, which result in a technical and nothing else matters after that.

Mauer's comments above were in answer to questions about Waiters fouling Gino. Had the question been, did Gino commit a technical by crossing the plane...maybe we get that part of the correct answer, too.

 

it was more of a general post. but the spurs get screwed in the sense that this was definitely a missed call but it wasn't the reason they lost. Ginobli's comments after the game were pretty much spot on. With that said it just sucks so much controversy came from this after a well played game by both teams.

 

The technical by Ginobody takes precedence on the play. Nothing Waiters does after that counts.

But it won't surprise me if the NBA L2R ignore Gino crossing the plane so all they have to do is repeat the company line that "We've never seen that (Waiters' foul) before. We'll incorporate that into training now on."

 

true and also the clock started even before anyone touched the ball which would of resulted in a do over for waiters if called. just a crazy play.

 

True. Amazing how everyone on TNT is harping on the elbow by Waiters when Ginobili steps on the line before that. Don't understand how with all their staff that no one brought that out, especially Webber he went adamant that it was offensive foul by waiters.

 

this is the point . . . .where someone has to say . . . . BUT IT SHOULD NOT HAVE COME DOWN TO THE REFS

Rocket River
#Sarcasm

 

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Summary of the L2M report: Ginobili on the line, Waiters fouled Ginobili, Mills fouled Adams, Kawhi fouled Westbrook, Ibaka fouled Aldridge.</p>&mdash; Royce Young (@royceyoung) <a href="https://twitter.com/royceyoung/status/727587505021689857">May 3, 2016</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>