J
JAZZGASM
Guest
The weird thing is people on the Spurs board were complaining that the refs gave the jazz the win. Maybe fans truly are biased, because I really thought the majority of the bad calls went against the Jazz.
The weird thing is people on the Spurs board were complaining that the refs gave the jazz the win. Maybe fans truly are biased, because I really thought the majority of the bad calls went against the Jazz.
Absolutely. Those calls on Favors were some of the worst I've seen this year. And Manu was allowed his traditional quota of flops.
The weird thing is people on the Spurs board were complaining that the refs gave the jazz the win. Maybe fans truly are biased, because I really thought the majority of the bad calls went against the Jazz.
Absolutely. Those calls on Favors were some of the worst I've seen this year. And Manu was allowed his traditional quota of flops.
It's part of the long con. Remember to extend their championship window the Spurs have sent out Little Spurs drone front office guys and coaches. Anywhere they land they begin preaching rebuild through draft. Orlando, Philly, utah. All have Spurs ties.
So occasionally the spurs mole needs a little help. Heck, greg was probably about to lose patients with the rebuild and trade Enes and Burke, to Detroit for Josh Smith and Jennings. Well, when DOL caught wind of it he called the motherland and the motherland said they would take care of things. Suddenly Tony Parker is "injured" and Manu is chucking up prayers and throwing turnovers on every side. Pops feigns anger just to seal the deal and the Jazz get a taste of victory that will keep the long con going for atleast 3 more spurs victories. It is all so simple.
Look at any game thread. Win or lose, it doesn't matter. I dare you to find one where there are fewer than 5 complaints about how the refs are conspiring against the Jazz. I've also noticed that the frequency with which one complains about calls is inversely proportional to his intelligence. It is one of the best way to gauge whether someone's opinion is worth reading or not.
This is a ridiculous comment because it generalizes. There were a number of calls last night that were flat out mistakes. The replays showed this clearly. Near the end when Favors blocked Leonard was one of them; not sure about the second block because I don't recall seeing the replay but it looked clean to me. There also was one time when Manu slipped and fell without contact and they called the foul; the replay showed it clearly. There probably were others, but these stuck out in my mind. Of course, there are going to be mistakes, but when you make one at a crucial juncture like the Favors block of Leonard, it can turn a game around.
The fact you think I'm saying that referees don't make mistakes makes me wonder if it would be even worth explaining. But let's give it a try.
Some times refs make bad calls. Some of those bad calls will help us, and others will hurt us. Some of the time they will help us at crucial moments, other times they will cost us the game. When the latter happens, most will complain, and that's fine. We're only human. But stupid people will complain about the refs nearly every game. And that's because they're stupid.
Naturally, we react more emotionally to negative things than to the opposite. That's just our animal instinct. Consequently, bad calls that go against us evoke strong emotions, and are thus much more memorable. Those that help us are either filed under "normal ref mistake" or "tough call, could've gone either way". If your animal instinct trumps your higher cognitive functions, then you'll always feel like the refs are cheating you, because that's all you notice. But there are those of us who can transcend that simple-mindedness. Thus, if I was ever ranking people based on their intelligence, I'll take the "number of complaints about refs" criterion over an IQ test every time.![]()
This forum is one of a kind.
Just posing the question ... not saying they threw the game but it crossed my mind.
Tim Duncan tied his season high in minutes against us in a "charitable game".
Truth is stranger than fiction ... I'm just thinking outside the box. Maybe you all are a bit too naïve. And for the Spurs, I don't think home court is as big a deal as other teams. The best teams can win anywhere. I remember in 1969, the Celtics didn't have home court advantage in any of their playoff series and won the championship.
That also happened in 1995 with the Rockets, Mr. W.T.F. Nonsequitur.