The Refs Stole The Game

[MilfordHusky]

...or for that matter, hitting any of a slew of layups and bunnies that most any eighth-grader could have easily scored. This WNBA final was a step backward for a league that struggles with quality issues and the public perception of its performance.

I thought the level of play was good, and the games were hard-fought and exciting. But the officiating continued to suck.

 

[Checkmate]

Does it help the WNBA when the league Champion is from the #2 TV market ?

 

[bbsamjj]

Let it be known that the game is final. Its over. But don't tell me what to believe or think. We all have our opinions.

Many foreseen the direction that game was heading in if the review was awarded immediately.

Don't hate us because our views doesn't align itself with some or yours. And I don't care how much so call knowledge one may think they have facts are facts and cannot be disputed.

Yes the Sparks was awarded the win. But in my eyes And mind they didn't. That's my opinion. Like it or not. You can write a book about afterwards And it still won't matter to me regardless.

Lynx scored on that play. And if that basket is wave they are now up 4 points with under 40 something seconds left Plain and simple. Chew in that.

No one needs to write a book regarding those facts.

"Lynx scored on that play. And if that basket is wave they are now up 4 points with under 40 something seconds left Plain and simple. Chew in that."

That's not even true.

If the basket doesn't count, it's 71-71 with 1:12 left in the game.

Her is what happened after LA went up 73-71:

Augustus makes a jumper to tie the game.

LA misses a 3-pt shot, rebounded by Minnesota.

Moore missed a 3-pt shot, rebounded by Brunson, who is fouled. Brunson makes 1/2 FT's.

Parker makes a lay-up.

Moore makes a jumper.

Gray misses a jumper.

THE LEAGUE MVP IS ALLOWED TO GRAB AN OFFENSIVE BOARD, gets her shot blocked, and then makes a follow-up.

Whalen misses a long 3pt shot.


So much happened after that play that it's impossible to predict what could have happened if the shot didn't count. At the end of the day, a missed FT by Minnesota and more importantly, a missed defensive rebound, cost them the championship.

 

[malevocalist#]

"Lynx scored on that play. And if that basket is wave they are now up 4 points with under 40 something seconds left Plain and simple. Chew in that."

That's not even true.

If the basket doesn't count, it's 71-71 with 1:12 left in the game.

Her is what happened after LA went up 73-71:

Augustus makes a jumper to tie the game.

LA misses a 3-pt shot, rebounded by Minnesota.

Moore missed a 3-pt shot, rebounded by Brunson, who is fouled. Brunson makes 1/2 FT's.

Parker makes a lay-up.

Moore makes a jumper.

Gray misses a jumper.

THE LEAGUE MVP IS ALLOWED TO GRAB AN OFFENSIVE BOARD, gets her shot blocked, and then makes a follow-up.

Whalen misses a long 3pt shot.


So much happened after that play that it's impossible to predict what could have happened if the shot didn't count. At the end of the day, a missed FT by Minnesota and more importantly, a missed defensive rebound, cost them the championship.

If that basket is taking away the Lynx is up 2 points. Maybe the 4 points is stretching it. But if I am not mistaken Minnesota did score down the other end.

And even if all that is wrong didn't Minnesota lose by what? One (1)? Take away now the 2 pts. Hmmmm.


If that call is made when it should have been made It definitely changes the whole mindset among the players and coaches on both teams if not the game.

The lynx have the ball who can now go up by 2 pts with maybe 45 to 50 seconds left, not to mention the Lynx did score. More time would have been taking off the clock once LA got the ball back, and even more time elasping once with the Lynx inbounding the ball now compelling LA to start fouling Minnesota.

But those scenero's never played themselves out due to (one) blown call.

That's why I cringe when some people make foolish statements to justify the failure to review the play immediately. Saying, "One Call Doesn't Change The Game, And They Deserved It Due To The Failure To Call The 8 sec. Violation In LA.

SAY IT AIN'T SO. Ain't It Na?

How many times we've watched many NBA, Baseball and Football playoffs or championship games where blown calls or bad calls and even (1 BAD CALL) Devastated a team? I've seen many.

And you can't go back in time to the failed 8 sec violation call. Yes it's bad too but neither justify the other. This was the last game of a best of 5.

And what makes it even more terrible is that someone did (SIGNAL) for a review immediately but the refs ignored it and kept playing.

Did they want Candance to win? Who knows.

SAD DAY FOR THE LYNX.

 

[Bigpetunia]

Referrees/umpires making mistakes is part of every contest, an unfortunate part, to be sure, but an unsurprising part given that they are human. How big a deal it is, of course, in the eye of any given fan, is colored by that fan's specific rooting interest in a particular game. It's just one more aspect of sports that "comes with the territory." We don't have to like it, and we can hope for better officiating, but this happens at every level. Generally speaking, suggestions that officials deliberately influence outcomes, one way or the other, are silly and fairly juvenile. No, I don't think the refs "wanted Candace to win." They just screwed up. Big deal...this ain't world peace we're talkin' about!

 

[HuskiesU]

So basically the WNBA champions is the Lynx but the Sparks get to put the 2016 Trophy in their Trophies case.

If i was an LA Fan i wouldnt be so proud of this one

 

[malevocalist#]

Referrees/umpires making mistakes is part of every contest, an unfortunate part, to be sure, but an unsurprising part given that they are human. How big a deal it is, of course, in the eye of any given fan, is colored by that fan's specific rooting interest in a particular game. It's just one more aspect of sports that "comes with the territory." We don't have to like it, and we can hope for better officiating, but this happens at every level. Generally speaking, suggestions that officials deliberately influence outcomes, one way or the other, are silly and fairly juvenile. No, I don't think the refs "wanted Candace to win." They just screwed up. Big deal...this ain't world peace we're talkin' about!

"suggestions that officials deliberately influence outcomes, one way or the other, are silly and fairly juvenile."

like where were you when the FBI busted that NBA ref? Ok.

To say it is impossible for it to ever take place is naive at best. In the words of the NBA ref who got caught, "if you think for one minute it's just me doing this, you better think again, because it's more than me."

Now with that said I am sure those refs who refuse to review the play could care less whether candance won or not. True that. But to make statements declaring it's impossible is ludicrous. As many here knows it's possible.

I am sure many refs at one time or another wanted to stick it to Geno & his players on the road to 11 championships. Even during some of those games Uconn dominated their opponents. Except Geno & crew wasn't about to leave any thing to chance or human error. So, they blew the doors off of everyone.

Sometimes you got to take the whistle out of the refs mouth etc.

The officials may not of had anything to do with Candance & LA winning. True that.

But they deliberately ignored a summons to review the play immediately.

Even when the Lynx coach got there attention prior to Minnesota scoring.

So to say no coach has ever done it when in time past they have is intentional blindness on your part.

In addition, no one knows what is in the mind of every ref. One were caught betting in NBA games. I assume you think it's 1 out of a billion who were doing it.

 

[Charlie]

I read a ref asked for a review after the play and it was ignored . If this is true, then it is more than just a missed call.

 

[malevocalist#]

I read a ref asked for a review after the play and it was ignored . If this is true, then it is more than just a missed call.

Say it ain't so Charlie, say it ain't so!!!

 

[malevocalist#]

I read a ref asked for a review after the play and it was ignored . If this is true, then it is more than just a missed call.

Charlie you absolutely correct. A miss call is something your unaware of at the moment. Or you missed it entirely. You wasn't paying attention. Nevertheless, someone got your attention and alerted you regarding it and you still ignored it. Why?

We understand human error is possible. But this just wasn't human error. It was wilful by virtue of ignoring it after being summon to examine the play, knowing that the rule book demanded an immediate review.

To take it deeper there was still time to review the play prior to Minnesota scoring. But they still refused. Why?

Did the 8 sec. Violation missed in LA suspended your judgement? Were you in debt due to a miss call in game 5? Then why?

Let's go deeper. You were summoned by a ref soon after the shot to conduct a review immediately after the basket and still chose to Blantly ignore the summons. Why?

Why did you continue to play after being alerted to review the point?

You then took your sweet TIME approaching the table to see your deliberate error. And then yoy say, "there is nothing we can do at this point, the rule book prohibits it"

All of a sudden the rule book became effective after the fact? You now remember the rules. Ain't it na.

You had pre-knowledge that it was to late. But was unaware it needed to be reviewed before it was to late after being alerted? Why?

How is it you knew the rule so CLEARLY when it was to late, but not in advance when you were summoned to examine the play?

But we weeping & lamenting. But who's blind & dense?

Ain't it na

 

[bbsamjj]

If that basket is taking away the Lynx is up 2 points. Maybe the 4 points is stretching it. But if I am not mistaken Minnesota did score down the other end.

And even if all that is wrong didn't Minnesota lose by what? One (1)? Take away now the 2 pts. Hmmmm.


If that call is made when it should have been made It definitely changes the whole mindset among the players and coaches on both teams if not the game.

Agree, which is why you can't assume that if the game is tied, the Lynx go down and Augustus makes the same 2pt shot she makes. Maybe she does, or maybe someone gets fouled and there are FT's, or maybe Moore makes a 3, or maybe the ball is stolen and Toliver makes a lay-up.

Was the call wrong? Yes.

Even so, the Lynx, with 23.4 seconds to go, were given the chance to go up 2 at the FT line. Instead, they went up 1.

After quick baskets by both teams, the Lynx were still up by 1 with 15 seconds to go. With 5 seconds to go, the Sparks miss a shot. With 4 seconds to go, they block a shot by LA, before Nneka puts the Sparks up on their THIRD shot of their final possession.

Your assertion that the refs could have planned any of this is pretty hard to believe.

 

[malevocalist#]

Umm no one is really saying the ref plan anything so stop inserting your own assumptions regarding my post.

I was just playing with that thought as many others. I am sure they didn't plan it.
But they sure in hell did a lot to avoid reviewing it. And their refusal to review it doesn't at all warrants a declaration as a miss call.

Saying they plan it that way is jumping out of building. But they had much to say so about those 2 points than not. The refs silence spoke volunes. Some heard them loud & clear.

You must of had your ears clogged.

 

[Bigpetunia]

It's all rigged, don't forget that...it's rigged BIGLY!!

 

[bbsamjj]

Umm no one is really saying the ref plan anything so stop inserting your own assumptions regarding my post.

I was just playing with that thought as many others. I am sure they didn't plan it.
But they sure in hell did a lot to avoid reviewing it. And their refusal to review it doesn't at all warrants a declaration as a miss call.

Saying they plan it that way is jumping out of building. But they had much to say so about those 2 points than not. The refs silence spoke volunes. Some heard them loud & clear.

You must of had your ears clogged.

Everyone agrees they missed the call. But are you saying they purposefully rigged the game or not?

 

[malevocalist#]

Everyone agrees they missed the call. But are you saying they purposefully rigged the game or not?

No I am not saying they purposely rigged the game. But I just can't put my finger on or fix my mind on this fact:

Why did they ignore to review the play when they were alerted to do so before Minnesota scored?

Especially knowing the rules in advance. Can someone explain that?

 

[CocoHusky]

Why did they ignore to review the play when they were alerted to do so before Minnesota scored?
Can someone explain that?

Not sure.
No.
How do those actions that are not explainable lead to an accusation of "refs stealing a game?

 

[Justavisitor]

I read a ref asked for a review after the play and it was ignored . If this is true, then it is more than just a missed call.

The ref signaled for review, BUT DID NOT IMMEDIATELY STOP PLAY. The rule is that reviews within the final 2 minutes, must be done with immediate stoppage. You can not allow play to continue for an entire minute and then review, because the final 2 minutes of close games are strategize based on the score.

IT WAS 71 - 71 when Nneka scored and put LA up by 2 and the score was 73 LA to 71 Lynx. The box score (play by play on ESPN) clearly shows this as factual with regards to the score. The ref should have stopped play right when basket went in. He then should have waved off the basket. The score would have been 71 - 71, Lynx with ball with 1:12 remaining. Anything could have happened.

Had the refs decided to review, how do they undo 45 seconds of play that occurred after that shot? The ref screwed up by allowing play to continue and deciding to review at the next dead ball. This is fine at all other times, except the last 2 minutes. The ref is guilty of not knowing basic rules. When he stopped play to review, the officials gathered and were reminded of the rule, so they were not allowed to review the play. That's the dilemma in the final minutes of a close game. In all other sports, reviews must be done prior to more action or you can no longer review. Football coaches must throw in a challenge before the ball is snapped. Tennis player must challenge before playing the shot. Basketball allows more leeway, but not in the last 2 minutes. It's the rule.

 

[JoePgh]

No I am not saying they purposely rigged the game. But I just can't put my finger on or fix my mind on this fact:

Why did they ignore to review the play when they were alerted to do so before Minnesota scored?

Especially knowing the rules in advance. Can someone explain that?

It is entirely possible either that the ref was not instantly aware that they were within the last two minutes, or that he momentarily forgot that that made a difference. After all, the refs are accustomed to signaling for a review and then doing the review at the next stoppage of play. That is what they do for 38 minutes of each game, so it isn't easy to get used to the fact that it changes in the last two minutes.

I don't believe that the ref who signaled for a review thought that there was a shot clock violation. If he thought that there was, he would have whistled a violation and washed out the basket. He probably just thought that it was close enough that it should be looked at, so he signaled his intention to do a review (forgetting that would not be possible in the last 2 minutes).

I'm not sure what he should have done if he thought it was possible but not probable that there was a shot clock violation. Suppose he had whistled to stop play without calling a violation. How could that be justified? If they reviewed the play and determined there was no shot clock violation, then Minnesota could legitimately claim that the ref had denied them an opportunity for a fast break by stopping play.

I think that the real effect of the "last 2 minute" rule is to shut down video review during that time. There are some cases where video review simply can't be done. For example, in football, suppose the referee blows the whistle thinking that a play is over without seeing that the ball carrier had fumbled the ball just before hitting the ground. Even though that was a mistake, it can't be reviewed and overturned because by blowing the whistle, the ref had caused other players to stop playing the down. This case is similar -- stopping play affects the game, so video replay isn't possible.

 

[triaddukefan]

I'm guessing this thread would not have been made had the situations been reversed and the Lynx were victorious in the same matter?

 

[j66kicker]

I'm guessing this thread would not have been made had the situations been reversed and the Lynx were victorious in the same matter?

Correct - you would have to go to VolNation for that one.

 

[malevocalist#]

I'm guessing this thread would not have been made had the situations been reversed and the Lynx were victorious in the same matter?

[ mod edit ]

Had the lynx won it would have been justice serve Dukie Duck fan. Wouldn't it?

And if what happen to the lynx in that same game happen to LA they would be protesting waving pickett signs...As you should be at this moment calling for the retirement of your coach.

Don't worry about the thread. It's over as far as I am concern. Enough said.

[ mod edit ]

 

[Justavisitor]

It is entirely possible either that the ref was not instantly aware that they were within the last two minutes, or that he momentarily forgot that that made a difference. After all, the refs are accustomed to signaling for a review and then doing the review at the next stoppage of play. That is what they do for 38 minutes of each game, so it isn't easy to get used to the fact that it changes in the last two minutes.

I don't believe that the ref who signaled for a review thought that there was a shot clock violation. If he thought that there was, he would have whistled a violation and washed out the basket. He probably just thought that it was close enough that it should be looked at, so he signaled his intention to do a review (forgetting that would not be possible in the last 2 minutes).

I'm not sure what he should have done if he thought it was possible but not probable that there was a shot clock violation. Suppose he had whistled to stop play without calling a violation. How could that be justified? If they reviewed the play and determined there was no shot clock violation, then Minnesota could legitimately claim that the ref had denied them an opportunity for a fast break by stopping play.

I think that the real effect of the "last 2 minute" rule is to shut down video review during that time. There are some cases where video review simply can't be done. For example, in football, suppose the referee blows the whistle thinking that a play is over without seeing that the ball carrier had fumbled the ball just before hitting the ground. Even though that was a mistake, it can't be reviewed and overturned because by blowing the whistle, the ref had caused other players to stop playing the down. This case is similar -- stopping play affects the game, so video replay isn't possible.

To be honest, there really isn't a good excuse for the officials to mess this one up. As a fan watching the game, I knew the rule and I also knew the review would not be allowed if they didn't stop play right away. The excuse of stopping a fastbreak doesn't work, because in this case, it was a made basket, so the Lynx had to take the ball out from under the basket after the made shot.

It was poor officiating at it's finest and it happens all too often. I simply do not agree that it cost the Lynx the game, because there was ample opportunity of 1:12 after that shot to still get the win.

Last, these officials get paid to do a job. At minimum, they could at least learn the basic rules. If myself, as a fan knows this rule, how in the world did they not? It's not a judgement call, like a foul or traveling, it's a simple rule.

 

[Geew1992]

What I don't understand is why not do what the NBA does. If a shot needs to be reviewed, make a gesture that the shot needs to be reviewed and at the next stoppage of play, review it. This way, there is no interruption in play and the review happens. Why is there a need for the review to happen right there and then? They can go back and watch a play at any given time.

 

[geneticrex]

I'm guessing this thread would not have been made had the situations been reversed and the Lynx were victorious in the same matter?

Since I value my credibility above and beyond the outcome of a sporting event..................I would have posted in the identical fashion had the teams been reversed.

 

[GiladKatzDeli]

Not taking anything away from the Sparks, but bad job by the refs. Replay is in place for a reason. If there's any chance that a call could be reversed, they need to use it, especially in a game of that magnitude.