Awful no-call at the end of the Spurs game.

[ERCougar]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

I noticed the NBA only commented on the Fisher no-call, but did not make any reference to the shot clock issue that preceded it.

The Spurs do not deserve the call on Fisher because it would be fruit of the poisonous tree.

If you're claiming the no-call was a make up, I'll give it to you. If you're claiming the no-call was legit on its own, no way.

[TripletDaddy]

Originally Posted by ERCougar

If you're claiming the no-call was a make up, I'll give it to you. If you're claiming the no-call was legit on its own, no way.

I am not claiming it was a make-up. I am saying that complaining about the no call is pointless given that the Spurs should not have had the ball to begin with.

The no-call was clearly a bad call. At least in my opinion. It looked like Fisher fouled him.

Another thing nobody is talking about.....Barry would have likely hit both FTs, tying the game. Then the Spurs would have had to win in OT.....and they never had a lead once in that game.

This is all a nice red herring. Spurs fans are crapping their pants because they know that this team, in its current state, is done. They are now older and slower and more injury prone. This is the same torch passing that took place when the Spurs ended the Lakers quest for a 4-peat.

[scottie]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

Kobe has received a lot of star treatment this series.

How many free throws has he shot?.....

I'm not going to waste any time with this argument if you're trying to argue that star treatment doesn't exist in the NBA.

[SoCalCoug]

Originally Posted by ERCougar

Wow...not sure where you got that conclusion.

"Attempted tackle by Barry"? What in the world...?

Bad no-call. He AT LEAST gets two shots. For those saying you don't make that call at the end of the game, you also don't leave your feet on defense at the end of the game. Very boneheaded move by Fisher, and he should have paid for it.

That's why I included the link to the video. He led with his shoulder, and moved into Fisher after Fisher left the ground.

[cougjunkie]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

I am not claiming it was a make-up. I am saying that complaining about the no call is pointless given that the Spurs should not have had the ball to begin with.

The no-call was clearly a bad call. At least in my opinion. It looked like Fisher fouled him.

Another thing nobody is talking about.....Barry would have likely hit both FTs, tying the game. Then the Spurs would have had to win in OT.....and they never had a lead once in that game.

This is all a nice red herring. Spurs fans are crapping their pants because they know that this team, in its current state, is done. They are now older and slower and more injury prone. This is the same torch passing that took place when the Spurs ended the Lakers quest for a 4-peat.

Let me go on record as saying that I have not complained once about the no-call. I also still have a glimmer of hope. The Spurs led by 20 in game 1, led by 20 in game 3, and had a chance to win game 4. This series could very easily be 3-1 SAS.

I think if San Antonio wins tonight they can force a game 7. But I really dont see them winning this series, 3 in a row from LA with two of them on the road is a near impossible task.

[ERCougar]

Originally Posted by TripletDaddy

I am not claiming it was a make-up. I am saying that complaining about the no call is pointless given that the Spurs should not have had the ball to begin with.

The no-call was clearly a bad call. At least in my opinion. It looked like Fisher fouled him.

Another thing nobody is talking about.....Barry would have likely hit both FTs, tying the game. Then the Spurs would have had to win in OT.....and they never had a lead once in that game.

This is all a nice red herring. Spurs fans are crapping their pants because they know that this team, in its current state, is done. They are now older and slower and more injury prone. This is the same torch passing that took place when the Spurs ended the Lakers quest for a 4-peat.

Ok...I see your point.

Regarding the OT issue, I think people are arguing that based on continuation, he gets three shots. This is tougher to argue--like you, I'd say he gets two shots and it goes into OT. And the Spurs lose anyway.

[SoCalCoug]

Originally Posted by cougjunkie

You obviously watched it through your Laker goggles.

Which is why I haven't really commented before now.

All I'm saying is I can see why the refs wouldn't have called it at the time. And if you're going to look at the super slo-mo, at least look at everything going on.

You can't look at the link and tell me that Barry didn't move into Fisher after Fisher had already left the ground.

[ERCougar]

Originally Posted by SoCalCoug

That's why I included the link to the video. He led with his shoulder, and moved into Fisher after Fisher left the ground.

I watched your link, and no way do I call it an "attempted tackle by Barry". Also, no way did Fisher go straight up, which is the only way you could call it either a foul on Barry, or a no call. I don't even think you can say Barry moved into him.

[SoCalCoug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Just looked at it, not a travel.

He shuffled both feet before the dribble. Isn't that by definition a travel?

[SoCalCoug]

Originally Posted by ERCougar

I watched your link, and no way do I call it an "attempted tackle by Barry". Also, no way did Fisher go straight up, which is the only way you could call it either a foul on Barry, or a no call. I don't even think you can say Barry moved into him.

Maybe splitting hairs, but I didn't call it an attempted tackle - I said it looks more like that than like Fisher coming down on Barry - a clumsy way of trying to say that the actual contact came when Barry put his shoulder into the airborne Fisher - not saying that Fisher wouldn't have contacted Barry had Barry gone straight up, but the contact as it existed was Barry moving into Fisher with his shoulder. Look at it closely.

I also didn't say Fisher went straight up. But he almost caught himself, and if Barry hadn't been moving into him, it's hard to say whether there would have been any significant contact when he came down.

I'm saying it's a close enough call that I can see why the refs didn't call it. It's not as clear-cut as the Laker haters are saying.