What's new
By:

Jazz vs. Thunder- LETS CRUSH THESE PUNKS

northeast said:
no , why do you call people idiots when you are wrong?

you can see in the video that the ball had not left durants hand when hayward hit it.
Click to expand...

The video was inconclusive from what I remember. I would appreciate a link to the play though, to take a closer look, if you have one. From what I remember, and they showed it several times, it was just too close to call. To overturn a call, you have to have strong video evidence.
 
you can see in the video that the force of the ball was not greater than the force of hayward's hand
and that based on the trajectory of the ball , and the followthrough of the two hands, the ball was off Durant
 
actually , I just realized this is an interesting example of why refs get so many calls wrong....
It is physics....as some one else said
It appears that maybe refs look for a single instance that they can freeze frame , and isolate the key point of impact as a picture...
but often the truth is not shown in a single picture,
but in the motion.
This is possibly a problem with other calls as well...esp. charge / blocking calls
 
I agree that there was a degree of inconclusiveness from the video...
but it did appear to show that call was incorrect, so why the need to call people idiots for stating this?
 
northeast said:
I agree that there was a degree of inconclusiveness from the video...
but it did appear to show that call was incorrect, so why the need to call people idiots for stating this?
Click to expand...

Some people where like "OMG the ball is going up and Hayward hit down, so it must be off DURANT!!!" which is just idiotic thinking.
Click to expand...

I was saying the people who thought that because Hayward stroke downward on the ball, and the ball went up, meant that 100% Durant touched it last.

Wasn't calling people idiots for thinking Durant touched it last because of the video, but to say for sure who did was too close to call, so they went with the OG call.
 
I think that one could argue it was off both of them at the same time, so you give the benefit of the doubt to the one with possession, this is possible.

This is different than the force argument.

High speed video might show this. The video from the TV does not break it down enough, you'd need like 100 frames a second to prove who it was off last conclusively. Even that might not be enough, it might be like splitting the atom. It appears that if it was not a tie, than it was off the offensive player based on available technology.
 
Cyrone Torbin said:
I was saying the people who thought that because Hayward stroke downward on the ball, and the ball went up, meant that 100% Durant touched it last.
Click to expand...
It does mean that it looked like it was not off Hayward. Either it was off Durant, or maybe it was off both hands at the same time, but not off Hayward's. It is highly unlikely that it hit haywards hand, bounced off durant's hand, grazed haywards hand again and continued in the same direction unimpeded by the contact with Haywards hand, and without further contact with Durant's hand, because of the motion and direction of both players hands. It is possible that in a hundreth of a second the ball is doing crazy stuff that we can't imagine looking at it with the naked eye, but I doubt it. Absent evidence to the contrary, it appears that the ball was moving in that direction because Durant was forcing it in that direction.
 
I watched the clip multiple times on my DVR. The ball was clearly touching Durrant's fingers *after* Hayward deflected it. This was evident from slow-mo replay and frame by frame freezing.
 
Cyrone Torbin said:
Yes. If the ball is deflected with a downward force that is less than the upward force, the ball is still going to travel upwards. It will veer off slightly, but the motion of the ball will still be up. Some people where like "OMG the ball is going up and Hayward hit down, so it must be off DURANT!!!" which is just idiotic thinking.

The call was made on the floor as OKC's ball. The review was pretty inconclusive. I for one couldn't definitely say who the ball was off of. Like in the NFL, these cases needs clear video evidence to be overthrown. There was none.
Click to expand...

Cool story, Bro. Watching the clip on my HD tv multiple times, slow-mo and freeze-frame, I saw conclusive evidence that, yes, it was off Durrant.
 
And no, I don't have the video, and no, I'm not going to take the time to upload it because it really doesn't matter in the long run. You can take my very insistent and confident word for it or not.
 
Gojazz79 said:
At this point Kanter has pretty much played against every team and no one has physically dominated him. If Bynum cant then the only guy with a chance is Howard. I just dont see anyone physically dominating Kanter.
Click to expand...

Yeah it's really cool, isn't it? Better than I'd expected. He got shocked in the early part of the season but gathered himself quickly. That getting blocked problem cannot be a permanent one. I think it's the result of being extremely confused about what to do in the court, thinkin' too much, as he himself once noted.
 
addictionary said:
Yeah it's really cool, isn't it? Better than I'd expected. He got shocked in the early part of the season but gathered himself quickly. That getting blocked problem cannot be a permanent one. I think it's the result of being extremely confused about what to do in the court, thinkin' too much, as he himself once noted.
Click to expand...

his footwork is so damn good for a 20 year old
 
Haha just read this thread and I also unknowingly followed the WTF laws of physics line of thought. I was entertaining myself with some My Cousin Vinny quotes in my head.

Vinny Gambini: So, Mr. Tipton, how could it take you 5 minutes to cook your grits when it takes the entire grit eating world 20 minutes?
Mr. Tipton: I don't know, I'm a fast cook I guess.
Vinny Gambini: I'm sorry I was all the way over here I couldn't hear you did you say you were a fast cook, that's it?
Mr. Tipton: Yeah.
Vinny Gambini: Are we to believe that boiling water soaks into a grit faster in your kitchen than anywhere else on the face of the earth?
Mr. Tipton: I don't know.
Vinny Gambini: Well, I guess the laws of physics cease to exist on top of your stove. Were these magic grits? Did you buy them from the same guy who sold Jack his beanstalk beans?

I don't have time to change it at work to fit the mold of "so refs your telling me that the laws of physics cease to exist on KD's hand. Your telling me that in the rest of the basketball playing world the ball would've went down BUT ONLY in that small section of the universe that is KD's hand that the ball went up despite GH's hand pushed down on the ball".... well heck y'all get the conversation in my head.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top