If you somehow need further catching up , here’s the news of the delay of the Last Two Minute Report, the Quick Reaction, the Reaction Podcast, and a special late-night post going deeper on the call in question.
Well, the NBA finally issued a statement on the matter, and it’s quite a statement indeed.
NEW YORK, November 21, 2016 – The National Basketball Association released the following statement today from Byron Spruell, President, League Operations, regarding the clock malfunction at the end of the Sacramento Kings’ 102-99 victory over the Toronto Raptors last night at Golden 1 Center:
“After review at the league office, we have concluded that the end of the game was officiated correctly by NBA rules. We reviewed all aspects of the final 27.4 seconds and below is a summary of our evaluation.
“Toronto inbounded the ball with 2.4 seconds remaining in the game, and the clock did not start when the pass was deflected by Sacramento’s DeMarcus Cousins. Per the NBA’s precision timing system, the clock can be started by either the referees or the clock operator. The referees noticed the clock malfunction immediately which triggered a replay review under rule 13.1.a.5, which states that a review must occur if ‘a play concludes (i) with no time remaining on the clock (0:00) at the end of any period or (ii) at a point when the game officials believe that actual time may have expired in any period; and the officials are reasonably certain that the game clock malfunctioned during the play.’
“Per rule 13.2.e.1, the Replay Center was then tasked with determining ‘the proper time (if any) on the game clock following the clock malfunction by determining how much time on the game clock actually expired.’ To determine how much time actually expired, Replay Center referee Zach Zarba used a digital timer on the Replay Center screen. The determination was that 2.5 seconds expired, thus negating the basket.
“We also reviewed the question surrounding the time left on the clock for Sacramento’s final possession. That possession started with 26.4 seconds remaining on the game clock since that is when Cousins secured possession of the rebound after a missed free throw. The subsequent shot clock violation on the Kings’ possession therefore left 2.4 seconds remaining in the game.”
So, everything was called correctly and nothing was wrong and if the Raptors wind up appealing (or if they already have), they’ll likely lose. Time to get over it, I suppose, but I still can’t wrap my head around the letter of the law ignoring the potential for players to change behavior based on a theoretical vs. visible game clock, however unlikely the successful outcome. You just have to let the players determine that, that’s crazy to me.
Let’s let J.J. Redick speak for all Raptors and Raptors fans:
And here are Masai Ujiri’s thoughts, per Doug Smith of the Toronto Star:
>For 47-plus minutes, both teams played a tough, hard-fought game. It wasn’t the perfect game by any measure, players made shots and missed some too, but the game was ultimately being decided between the lines.
Unfortunately, the final 2.4 seconds were decided by someone who wasn’t even in the arena. There’s a human element to every game of basketball and we missed it on the most important play of the game last night in Sacramento.
I agree completely. Overturning a call based on the precision of a replay center that can crack a play down to 0.1 seconds is just not reflective of the way the game is played the rest of the time. Between that, and the aforementioned potential butterfly effect of a correct clock, and I just don’t get it.
But we have no choice but to move on. I suppose.
