[UPDATED] What does it take to get a foul call these days?...

by Andrew Feinstein on May 28, 2008 12:48 AM MDT

I took a lot of heat for writing my "10 Reasons Why I HATE Lakers Fans" post prior to the Lakers demolishing the Nuggets in the first round of the playoffs. My #1 complaint was that Laker "fans" are in myopic denial of the NBA's favoritism towards them.

In their 93-91 loss to the Lakers tonight that will most assuredly seal their postseason fate, the San Antonio Spurs had no business even being within two points at the end of the game. The Lakers out-played them and out-hustled them throughout the contest. But the Lakers managed the clock down the stretch like a YMCA team, and the Spurs found themselves within two points with just 2.1 seconds left.

Brent Barry - brother of my all-time favorite one-season Nugget, Jon Barry - drew an obvious foul from the Lakers' Derek Fisher on a head fake before his last ditch three-point effort. The TNT analysts claimed that Barry didn't "sell the foul" well enough by not leaping into Fisher, but I still thought it was a blatant foul on Fisher. I'd go as far as to say that Barry shouldn't have been awarded three free throws, but at the very least it should have been a call on the floor, giving Barry two free throw attempts because the Lakers were in the penalty. I know we don't want the refs deciding crucial playoff games, but when a defensive player leaps into the air and clobbers his opponent beneath him, IT'S A FOUL! (Nevermind that notorious Spurs-hater Joey Crawford just happened to be the head official in this game).

But those are the breaks when you play the Lakers - just ask Sacramento, Portland and Detroit - and now the NBA is one game away from getting half of their dream matchup in the NBA Finals. I must confess that as a die-hard NBA fan I desperately want to see Lakers vs. Celtics, but it would be more enjoyable if the Lakers got there without any help from the refs.

[UPDATED] The NBA has officially announced that a foul call should have been made.

Tweet Comment 22 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Hey lay off Joey Crawford and the refs. It's not their fault that Crawford hates the Spurs and the league wants the Lakers in the NBA Finals. Oh wait, it is.

by Jonbear on May 28, 2008 1:12 AM MDT reply actions

Refs favoring the Lakers? No, you don't say?!! I recently heard that the sky is blue, water is wet and midgets are short, too!!

by Anonymous on May 28, 2008 1:18 AM MDT reply actions

NBA 2008 biggest business is

LAKER VS CELTIC

I love this business~! (as everbody knows)

haha just 4 fun

by Muse Favor on May 28, 2008 1:28 AM MDT reply actions

how the heck did the referees not see that as a foul? are you kidding me? i just watched the highlights now cos i just got home. that is bullsh!t right there. if anyone ever questions that the NBA isn't favourable to teams like the lakers... watch that play right there.

where amazing happens

by andrew fisher on May 28, 2008 5:32 AM MDT reply actions

Stuff like this is what bothers me about the NBA. I don't think it's a "conspiracy" or anything, because it happens every game, every year.

A foul in the regular season is not necessarily a foul in the playoffs.

A foul in the first 46 minutes of any given game is not necessarily a foul in the last 2 minutes of that game.

A foul by the 11th guy on the bench is not necessarily a foul buy the superstar.

Etc. If only there was some consistency. :(

by Chris C. on May 28, 2008 6:43 AM MDT reply actions

It is true that was a foul, and yes it should've been a two point foul because he dribbled the ball after contact. However, what the TNT analysts said is true, if you don't sell a foul you aren't gonna get it in the NBA, its like a charge if you don't fall down you're not gonna get the call no matter how big or small you are.
The greatest moment in NBA history was the basis of a no-call. When MJ pushed Russel away and hit the jumper.

by Anonymous on May 28, 2008 7:48 AM MDT reply actions

It WAS definitely a two-shot foul, but to think that the call wasn't made because the Spurs were playing the Lakers is ABSURD. This was just a typical NBA end-of-big-game no call....

by Anonymous on May 28, 2008 8:29 AM MDT reply actions

I am inclined to agree with you that Brent Barry should've been awarded two free throws but not three. However I can't help concluding from your articule, despite your impressive penant for research that, not only are you biased towards the L.A. Lakers, you also lack basic objectivity.

Your view on the officiating of this game is selectively one-sided, and is based on emotions that lack the benefit of intellect and does not merit any consideration.

The officiation of this game could be questionable by both teams. Case in point, How is it possible for Kobe to take 29 shots in the teeth of Spurs defence without a single trip to the fowl line in comparison to Duncan's? Did you see the replay of Kobe's last shot that it hit the rim and the refree ruled otherwise and as a result the refree did not put a new 24 seconds shot clock which eventually benefited the Spurs and created all of this Brent Barry fallacy? The issue is, the Lakers were not crying about officiating, they focused on the task at hand as evident in the ball game. They never trailed once,they played like they wanted it more and got the ' W ' Simple as that. The refree was not about to decide the game as you are suggesting. Even the Spurs,the Analyst and everybodyelse knew that. Except you....Better team won. Stop indulging in all sorts of selective perceptions and get over it.

by Michael on May 28, 2008 8:33 AM MDT reply actions

Is this Denver Stiffs or Lakers Haters? Come to think of it, is there even a difference?

It always humors me to hear fans play the 'conspiracy' card whenever a big market team like the Lakers, Knicks, Bulls or Heat seemingly get favorable calls in a game or in the lottery. You're a real STIFF if you are one of these people.

Think about your logic:

Joey Crawford, the Spurs hater, is secretly told by money hungry egomaniac David Stern to make sure the Lakers win this series because that is good for the NBA. So Crawford, the point guard for the NBA conspiracy, ensures a Lakers victory by putting Kobe to the line ZERO times in game 4. ZERO. As in NONE. He then decides not to reset the 24 second clock after Fisher's shot skimmed the rim and Horry kicked the ball out of bounds with 5 seconds left. Instead, he waits until there are 2 seconds left in the game with the Spurs down 2 points to decide not to call a foul 30 feet from the basket.

No conspiracy, you idiots, just basketball. Playoff basketball. And yes, there is a difference between playoffs and regular season. And yes, there is a difference between the last shot of the game and first shot of the game. The difference is that the referees let the players decide the game, not their whistles. It has always been this way.

And by the way, for those still whining about conspiracy, not one player on the Spurs, not Duncan, Ginobili, Barry, or Popovich, thought that a foul should have been called. The Spurs may be boring, but they're professional and classy.

You whiners and haters can learn a little from them.

by cousin paul on May 28, 2008 8:38 AM MDT reply actions

To assume that the NBA gave this game to The Lakes is absurd. Truth is, they came to play and won the game. If you Morons couldn't see that, I wonder what kind of game you were watching. Did any of you Jerry's kids see Fisher's shot hit the rim before going out off of 'Cheap shot Bob's foot? That should'a been the Jello jiggling in the refrigerator moment right there.
You don't here lakers whinning about it...I feel bad for the Spurs because they are realists (Real Men) contrary to you nutcases...This are not the Hornets, this are the Lakers. You better recognize...WORD!

by FADA on May 28, 2008 8:58 AM MDT reply actions

Considering Barry is maybe the one stand-up guy on a team FULL of whiners and floppers, it's a shame the no-call was on him, but come on--has any team benefited more from selective ref calls than the Spurs? This series is tough for me because I can't root for either team. They're both loathsome. But the Lakers are entertainingly loathesome, and the Spurs are mind-numbingly boring to watch, so...

I hate the Lakers as much as the next guy, but if the refs favored anyone last night, it was the champs.

by keeperdesign on May 28, 2008 9:54 AM MDT reply actions

The Spurs made the crucial mistake in letting Barry take that shot. If they wanted a foul call they have to let someone take it that can sell a jersey. If the shoe was on the other foot Kobe would be on the line no doubt.

by TheDanimal on May 28, 2008 9:55 AM MDT reply actions

These folks just don't get it. I agree with you it was a TWO SHOT Foul. As a Spurs fan I get pissed at Pop for always taking the "NO EXCUSES" path and not standing up for the team and making a stink like Phil Jackson, and George Karl and others do...it works and gets into the heads of the officials.

Ima brushed Fischer on a three point shot and got called for the foul. I hate this whole thing of "SELLING " the foul. If he does, they say it is forced and no call. Also, aren't they all playing the same game...BASKETBALL? Why if Kobe or Manu take that shot, it is a foul, but Brent does, no foul.

One more thing, the ball NEVER hit the rim. It grazed the bottom of the net if anything, but no rim. And finally your readers REALLY need to understand the Distain that Joey Crawford has for Tim Duncan and San Antonio. He has NO business officiating Spurs games. This man has made this about HIMSELF, and he can't be trusted to be objective. Remind your readers in game 5 of the Phoenix series, when we had him and he put his hands on Pop, Tim Duncan had 23 REBOUNDS in that game and only 1 foul. So don't cry poor KOBE to me. Been there, seen it, had it done to us...Joey Crawford, if you watch the replay of the final play is leaning on the scores table with absolutely NO INTENTION of calling a foul. The man is the Antichrist!!!!!!

by Anonymous on May 28, 2008 10:08 AM MDT reply actions

When Brent Barry got Fisher in the air last night, he has to go right into him and force the referees to make that call. If he does that he gets the call, goes to the line for three FTs, and the Spurs probably win the game. This would NOT be an instance of the refs deciding the game; the player would have decided the game by committing a foul 30 feet from the basket. Seriously, what was Fisher doing jumping so far from the basket?

That being said, the Spurs also benefitted from a couple of bad calls. The last Fisher shot hit the rim and the 24 second clock should have been reset with about five seconds left, forcing the Spurs to foul. But the worst was the traveling no-call on Duncan in the first half where he took about four steps before a dunk. I am not saying that San Antonio was favoring by the refs, I am saying that things even out. Plus, it's tough to say that the officials favored LA when the 26-19 FT disparity favored the Spurs.

I hate the Lakers as much as any good Nuggets fan, but the result last night was not due to crooked officiating.

by Matthew on May 28, 2008 10:59 AM MDT reply actions

it is ridiculous that every call went the spurs way the entire game, and then the ONE call that went for the lakers, which was a no-call, is the only one you idiots keep talking about.
watch that replay of lamar odom's SICK block at the end of the game and try to tell me that it was actually goaltending. get outta here.
and yes, the spurs got a no call too, but i don't think anyone but tim duncan in that game could travel from the three point line and still be permitted to dunk the ball with out a whistle blowing.

stick a fork in the spurs, and the rest of you morons...

by effrom on May 28, 2008 11:35 AM MDT reply actions

Funny that your blog doesn't mention Duncan's travel
in the first half, Kobe's zero free throws attempts,
or the the fact that Fisher's last shot should have
reset the 24 second clock and ended the game......

by Chris M on May 28, 2008 11:39 AM MDT reply actions

Hmmm... funny, what about Kobe's travel with 23 seconds left that was not called, dude looked like he was on ice, and the "BLOCK" by Odem..ha ha, dude was lucky he was not called for the foul along with the goaltend, it was a foul. The shot NEVER hit the rim, it grazed the net and that was it. The calls were equally bad the entire game, but the fianl NO call was just bad and a poor display of what the NBA has come down to. Just because you make the call, does not mean Barry hits all the free throws. He controls the outcome and at best, it would have only tied since he was not in the act of shooting.

by Anonymous on May 28, 2008 12:17 PM MDT reply actions

I usually agree with Andrew on a lot of things but when it comes to the Lakers we have our differences. There were too many no calls in this game for anyone one to claim foul play. Also, Kobe attempted 0 free throws. Contrary to what a lot of people have been saying, there wasn't a huge disparity in FT attempts, however the Lakers should have gotten more attempts at the line due to the fact that they were more aggressive.
In conclusion, the NBA has never seen a game without a questionable call, for crying out loud, have you been to an NBA game, there is so much holding and touching, and pulling of jerseys that if they called everything, teams would be averaging 50 Free Throws a game.

by Anonymous on May 28, 2008 3:58 PM MDT reply actions

Oh puh-lease...
Whine me a river.

1. Explain to me - if there's favoritism towards the Lakers - why prior to the end-of-game hacking, the Spurs held a 26-13 free throw advantage?
2. Kobe Bryant - 28 points, no free throws. For that matter, 6 FTs this series versus 96 versus the Jazz. I get that the Jazz foul more, and that we're measuring 6 games against 4... but pardon?
3. If we're going to whine & moan about missed stuff, how about the simple fact that the Spurs shouldn't have even had the ball given the clock should've been reset post Fish's shot hitting the rim?
4. Fisher jumps up. Not at Barry. Barry sets the ball to floor and DRIBBLES into Fisher. If he'd actually been shooting, maybe, maybe a foul. But dribbling? It's just as much a charge as a defensive foul.
5. The game clearly went the way of the Spurs re. calls. 'Cept that one. Wonder why the Spurs are quiet?
6. There were no-calls all the way through the game. You're of the opinion that the game should be called differently inside the last seconds of the game?
7. "...but it would be more enjoyable if the Lakers got there without any help from the refs."
You have to be kidding me... did you watch all of the game or just the last play?
The Lakers got HAMMERED on calls all game! Anyone who just watched the highlights and said "wait, that's a foul" has no idea on 'context'.
8. Michael: spot on. Except it was Fish's shot that hit the rim.
9. The end result was correct. The only thing was that it was only due to the poor game call that the Spurs were actually in the position to steal it... and a 'steal' it would have been had they won.

I'm a fan Andrew, but as has been stated here, you're a lil' over-the-top when it comes to LA.

Don

by Don (With Malice...) on May 28, 2008 11:14 PM MDT reply actions

As I was watching the Eastern finals game ESPN kept showing the headline that the NBA stated that a foul should have been called and that it should have been a two shot foul for impeding Barry.

I do believe that if the same thing happened with Kobe on the other side a foul would have been called. A conspiracy? Who knows, but the officiating in the NBA ruins the game.

In tonights game the announcers said, "all that is expected of an NBA ref is consistency."

I have never seen less consistency in any sport at any level.

Does anyone have a link to the story about the NBA's statement?

by Not anonymous? on May 28, 2008 11:21 PM MDT reply actions

It'll take a lot for me to feel sorry for a team such as the Spurs.

Speaking of which... have you seen where the majority of Manu's salary will go starting next season???

LOL!

by Geerten on May 29, 2008 8:44 AM MDT reply actions

To be honest I just think it is karma. The Spurs beat the suns due to an incorrect ruling last year when Diaw and Stoudamire got suspended one game. So yes it was a foul and it didn't get called and it might cause the spurs a championship, I on the other hand could care less for the spurs, they were out-played and not only that but the Lakers deserved to win that game

by Anonymous on May 29, 2008 3:07 PM MDT reply actions

Comments For This Post Are Closed

STIFF LIST (as of 4/26 by Andrew Feinstein)

1. METTA WORLD PEACE

Metta resorted back to Ron Ron last Sunday by clubbing James Hardenwith an "inadvertent celebratory elbow", landing him a 7-game suspension. Apparently, changing his name didn't prevent NBA commissioner David Stern from overlooking Metta's past behavior problems.

2. CHARLOTTE BOBCATS

The 'Cats are on the verge of securing the worst winning percentage in NBA history. Given that the guy who runs the team - Michael Jordan - had previously drafted Kwame Brown and Adam Morrison, should this really be a shock?

3. OKLAHOMA CITY THUNDER
The team that was supposedly built to overcome the lockout-shortened season managed to lose 7 of its last 14 games, ceding the Western Conference's 1-seed to the Spurs in the process. Their reward might be a first round matchup with defending champion Dallas.

4. BILLY HUNTER AND DEREK FISHER

With report after report coming out about NBPA union head Hunter's shady, nepotistic dealings and questions arising about Fisher's own role in dealing with NBA owners behind Hunter's back during the lockout, this off-the-court scandal could prove to be more exciting than the playoffs themselves!

5. STEVE NASH AND THE PHOENIX SUNS
The Suns are on this list for squandering the last few great seasons from Nash. Nash is on this list for his stupidly stubborn loyalty to a franchise as awful as the Suns.