Enough is enough. We saw this with the Rockets/Hawks game. And this happened again 2/12 with the Spurs/Knicks and Kings/Pelicans. -Under 2 minutes, player is FOULED (not called) and loses the ball out of bounds. -Ref reviews the play, SEES the FOUL but by RULE can't call it. And sees the player that WAS FOULED lose the ball out of bands and thus is FORCED to give the ball to the other team. This is ridiculous. NBA needs to change this rule so the refs can correctly make the right call and not have this injustice. And they better do this soon before it bites them in the ass in a big game like the NBA Finals.
I agree, they need to make it like football and say "all aspects of the play" can be reviewed on a review.
A ton of these reviews in general are just ridiculous. The ones that take way longer than it should and completely disrupts the flow of a game
So, NFL can review an inbounds play on a pass and change the call to Pass Interference instead? Or can review a fumble and call Holding instead?
That's a good point. Although I'd say NBA fouls are much less subjective than pass interference or holding calls.
I still can't believe it takes so damn long for the replays we do have. I haven't been given a good reason why these sports don't just have a "replay guy" in every arena/stadium that can give a simple thumbs up/thumbs down upon request. We have the answer at home within 15 seconds.
My question wasn't rhetorical. I don't know what NFL rules are. So you are saying they can't look for Pass Interference or Holding when reviewing plays for possession? What can the NFL review more than the NBA can on a review for out of bounds.
They can review "all aspects of the play" but doesn't include calling penalties. For example, if a guy makes a questionable catch and goes out of bounds in a tip toe catch, they can review whether he had possession of the ball, had both feet in bounds, went to the ground with possession, etc.
Ok. All aspects of the play wrt possession. But NBA is the same, no? Say they review a rebound tipped out of bounds. They can review who tipped it last, but also whether the ball hit the rim for a 24-second violation. was the 2nd to last person to touch it actually out of bounds. Did someone reestablish inbounds position prior to touching the ball. I.e. All aspects of the play wrt possession, but not penalties. I always thought NBA and NFL have pretty much same rules for what is reviewable. If so. I don't agree that we should change it to allow foul calls,
What we can't have, is someone FOULING someone blatantly, causing the ball to go out of bounds, have everyone see this injustice and then see the refs forced to give the ball back to the FOULING team. That's Effed up. Just make a rule that that one aspect can be reviewed under 2 minutes. If someone loses the ball out of bounds because they were "clearly fouled" either charge the foul to that person, OR just give the team possession. Hell, even jump ball it as the worst of it. But don't give the fouling team the benefit.
You're right, it's pretty much the same although it's a bit apples and oranges since there are so many static aspects to reviewing a football play like the checklist to a requirements of a catch. I'm still in favor of the OP's premise though, as I think a foul in basketball is way less subjective than most calls in football.
Do you think we can include the word "blatant" in the reviewable aspects, or do we have to include any foul on the last person who touched the ball. slippery slope? Hell, in the super bowl didn't we see a blatant face mask on an out of bounds review that couldn't be called.
There's no financial benefit to the NBA to provide a dedicated resource at every NBA arena to review replays. It takes a ton of technology to do it, and is cost prohibitive. Secondly, the NBA is all about the gamblers/point shavers not being able to gain an advantage. Vetting that many people to make critical calls with the game, and thus the betting line at stake would be costly and difficult. It makes more sense to have all of the replays to be done centrally, in a controlled environment, with multiple levels of accountability. Same reason the NFL does it that way.
Personally, I think an interference call that happened with the same players involved in a reviewed play should be able to be reversed. An unrelated action somewhere else on the field shouldn't be looked at in a review. I think this is the point of the OP. An inbound play is inseparable from whether the guy was fouled or not. The purpose of review is supposed to determine whether the offensive team had possession of the play by the limited sequence of actions at the end of the play. I understand it is not always easy to draw the line which parts of the play can be considered related to the result. But at least that should be the spirit of reviewing.
So the rule I have with my students and a regrade is that I regrade the entire problem, not just the part you think I was overly critical. That means your score can go down if you ask for one. The NBA could do something similar, so a foul could be assessed if a replay is called for by a team. Unfortunately, I could also see this slowing down the game pretty dramatically in the last two minutes. So I'm not sure if this won't just create another problem in its place.
Reviews always have the risk of magnifying the refs' mistakes without being able to amend them. But in this day and age of universal accessibility of game videos, officiating mistakes are bound to be magnified. They might as well try to find better ways to amend them as best as they can.
