RefCalls - Latest Comments

Re: Private: Contact

T-shady — Wed, 16 May 2012 01:31:04 -0000

I have been searching the web for a site that allows ppl to post their disappointment with NBA refs and the league as a whole. For the most part the league is becoming a joke. Refs making bad calls and other refs knows some of these calls are bad and don't want to make the other person look bad "instead of getting the call right", second - refs are beginning to act like little pansies being so sensitive when players react to "BAD" calls. . . not disrespectful. If it's okay for David Stern to fine players for stupid reasons and refs to hit players with technical fouls when their feelings been hurt . . . then refs should be ALSO FINED WHEN THEY BLOW CALLS - OBVIOUS ONES! which has been the NORM not the EXCEPTION. better for me if I just stop watching nba and go back to high school the refs are better at making right calls. hahaha

Re: Status of RefCalls.com (& TopFlops.com) for this NBA season

Staff — Tue, 13 Mar 2012 04:34:27 -0000

Thanks. There is definitely a need for this, but the economics just don't work right now. Hopefully it will someday.

Re: Status of RefCalls.com (& TopFlops.com) for this NBA season

Rex — Tue, 13 Mar 2012 03:47:06 -0000

Sorry,didn't read through before the comment.It's pretty tough.Hope you guys would figure a way out.
This's a nice website. Good luck!

Re: Status of RefCalls.com (& TopFlops.com) for this NBA season

Staff — Mon, 12 Mar 2012 14:19:59 -0000

Thanks for the compliment. The post above pretty much explains it.

Re: Status of RefCalls.com (& TopFlops.com) for this NBA season

Rex — Mon, 12 Mar 2012 02:38:24 -0000

I appreciate the articles illustrating the miscalls during last season finals,why there isn't any since?

Re: Status of RefCalls.com (& TopFlops.com) for this NBA season

Thanatos — Sun, 29 Jan 2012 16:59:39 -0000

I hope you guys are able to find your investor. I found this site very enjoyable and showed your analysis to many friends.

Re: If the NBA was a legendary restaurant, many customers would want improvement

Staff — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 22:40:11 -0000

I know we have used the word "half-step" before. That's our terminology, not the league's. More specifically, we wrote in a blog post that, "There’s a second category of travels that’s frequently missed that we’ll call…Sneaking in an extra 1/2 step or full step while “completing a dribble”"

We go into great detail about the "completion of a dribble" issue that starts around the middle of the page at http://refcalls.com/2011/04....

Re: If the NBA was a legendary restaurant, many customers would want improvement

Staff — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 22:34:28 -0000

We wrote a post that discusses in detail when a dribble ends as written in the rulebook at http://refcalls.com/2011/04.... The rulebook is definitely vague and that's the purpose of this site -- to get the league motivated to clarify what constitutes the end of a dribble (as well as other items) better than how it is written in the rulebook today.

Regarding someone "credible" backing our arguments, we have two responses to that: 1) There are too many people, even many basketball writers, who have no motivation to make waves about the problems with the referees and the rulebook because in essence it would be "biting the hand that feeds them." If the integrity of the game of basketball is questioned, that could hurt the league in the short-term, thus affecting ad revenue, thus affecting their job security, etc. 2) Although one would expect journalists to go into the type of analysis we are going into here (but aren't), it has become very common for "citizen journalists" and bloggers to break very big stories that many people in the mainstream overlook. Just look at how Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were leading our country down a path of financial destruction, but no one with "credibility" in government was willing to step up and say what was going on was wrong until way after the housing market collapse. I would caution you not to wait for someone with "credibility" to back up someone's premises, because many times it won't happen because they want to play it safe and not rock the boat. The same thing happened with the John Edwards scandal. No "credible" paper investigated it, and it took the often-teased "National Enquirer" to break a very big story.

So I would recommend that if you and others read the analysis and judge it for yourself, and not wait for someone "credible" to endorse it, maybe some kind of movement will start at a grass roots level to get the powers-that-be to finally address it.

Re: If the NBA was a legendary restaurant, many customers would want improvement

m morales — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 21:45:25 -0000

you did use the word "half-step" when trying to describe what you call a travel. im not attacking just lending some advice for you guys.

Re: If the NBA was a legendary restaurant, many customers would want improvement

m morales — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 21:43:58 -0000

i stand corrected. after thorough review of your site i understand what your motives and goals are and i respect that. youre right, it doesnt say that a player is allowed a "gather step" in the rule book. however, it doesnt say that a dribble is ended when you guys seem to interpret it. i think the nba needs to clarify the verbatim for referees, players, coaches, and fans. i am not trying to put you guys down or demoralize what you are trying to do nor do i want to defend my stance to the death. i just think your site would be much more interesting if you had someone credible to back your premises. i understand where youre coming from and what youre trying to do i just would like to see some more substantiated evidence backing your arguments... specifically the travel calls.

Re: If the NBA was a legendary restaurant, many customers would want improvement

Staff — Mon, 05 Dec 2011 03:44:02 -0000

I never said "half step" is in the rulebook. That's my terminology, not the NBA's. I encourage you to read our commentary more closely.

Re: If the NBA was a legendary restaurant, many customers would want improvement

Staff — Mon, 05 Dec 2011 03:40:02 -0000

You are wrong. Look in the rule book and point out where the word "gather" is even used. It's not there. We have scoured it over and over and it's not there, not even using different terminology, and we have written about it countless times, but unfortunately everyone, including refs like Ronnie Nunn on his TV show, use that word when the rules clearly don't permit it. That's one of the points of this site -- to point out how fans have been snowed over by idiot announcers and supposed "experts" about supposed rules that don't exist to enable spectacular plays that make ESPN Sportscenter highlights to help "sell" the game on plays that the defender has no chance of stopping. That's one of the reasons we may not continue the site this year. There are just too many people out there who don't know the rules as written, and they will defend to their death their position with no hope of them ever reading the rulebook and questioning conventional thinking. It makes it very tiring to have to explain to each person one at a time the same thing over again without them being open-minded (not to say you aren't). Very few people have changed their mind, so we may "move on" since NBA officiating is a lost cause that has no chance of being reformed, and the game is terribly flawed because of it. We must admit now that we know what we know about the disparity between the rules and how they are enforced, the NBA doesn't have much credibility in our minds any more.

Re: Analysis: the fouls that got Kobe mad before his homophobic slur

m morales — Sun, 04 Dec 2011 03:05:43 -0000

the foul call made by bennie was correct. that was definitely not incidental as bryant illegally displaced the defender by wrapping around is body with two hands and pushing him.

Re: How many travels refs miss per game, and the reasons why

m morales — Sun, 04 Dec 2011 02:24:36 -0000

this is a pretty good explanation of the rule and how it is often interpreted. well said mavsfan. i encourage your website to take a look at the show "making the call with ronnie nunn" on NBatv. this will give a better idea of how and why certain call or no calls are made.

Re: Grizzlies-Spurs (Game 2): Was this a charge or block? Plus, a good no-call on major flop

m morales — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 21:42:21 -0000

this is a quintessential "slip play"... its either an offensive foul on ginobli or no-call. defender is legal, then ginobli attempts to avoid contact and makes contact with the right shoulder of def. official should be thinking.. "was the contact marginal or illegal?" if he deems it was marginal then there should be a no call. if its illegal then we have an offensive foul.

my gut tells me the league would deem this illegal contact.

just a question.. how are you involved in the game of basketball? fan, player, coach, referee, coordinator of some sort? i just want to know where youre coming from in your thought process? i appreciate your effort and all the time you put in this. your passion is in the right place, its just that your knowledge about certain rules and interpretations are lacking a bit.

Re: If the NBA was a legendary restaurant, many customers would want improvement

Bballplyrref — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 17:59:03 -0000

by the way.. there is no such thing a "Half Step" when "traveling." i encourage you to contact some professional referees for some insight on the correct terminology to use. also ask them to take a look at the plays and see what they think..

Re: If the NBA was a legendary restaurant, many customers would want improvement

m.morales — Sat, 03 Dec 2011 17:50:14 -0000

after watching the first 4 plays and reading youre interpretation i have concluded that youre not familiar with NBA rules. the first 3 "traveling" plays are not travels. a player is allowed a gather step when gathering the ball to finish dribble. then the two steps are permitted. for example, the noah drive to the basket was not a travel as noah legally gathered the ball into his hands in mid-air and step immediately with his right foot to establish his "gather step" to end his dribble. subsequently, he takes two steps without dribbling and makes a try for goal. this is a legal play and the correct call was made by the center official.

Re: Bulls-Heat (Game 3): So many calls, and so little time to capture them all

NO-CHI — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 21:49:28 -0000

Well, looking at the calls it's no wonder it seemed like Chicago couldn't do anything. Plus, I think the bad calls that benefited the Bulls were makeup calls.

If Rondo drawing blood on Brad Miller wasn't worth a Flagrant. And plus the refs originally called Rondo throwing Hinrich into the Scorer's table a Flagrant 2 but then downgraded it to Flagrant 1.

Keeping that in mind, neither of Carlos Boozer's Flagrant Fouls can keep their status as Flagrant Fouls. Boozer didn't aim at the head and couldn't have caused an injury.

I like to apply this formula for a bad call involving a premier player.

"Would Player X (the easiest player to use in the league to compare to the Superstar due to height, weight, build, range, skill set, etc.) be able perform to same action and get the same result?"

99% of the time the answer is No.

Of course, the team that seems to suffer the most when it comes to bad calls favoring the other team is New Orleans Hornets.
I've seen them be on the receiving end of so many bad calls when playing against the big market teams it is ridiculous.

Re: Good no-call on Manu’s injury-inducing flop

Staff — Sat, 02 Jul 2011 01:10:28 -0000

No, we don't understand your argument because you are all over the place. You are also blind.

If you look at the slow-mo MORE CLOSELY at the 36-second mark, he throws his upper body and arms backward FIRST (flop #1), then jumps into the air and throws his left knee into Gasol's thigh (flop #2). This is the same left knee he is rubbing at the end of the video.

Everyone knows you don't flail your arms and upper body backwards BEFORE you suffer an injury to yourself. He injured himself while flopping, as our original argument stated. You are obviously either a Spurs fan, have a man-crush on Ginobili, or just completely clueless. I also can't believe you would spend so much time trying to defend your position--you really need to find something better to do with your time. The fact that I've spent 10 minutes of my life on this stupid argument trying to educate you, when everyone in the world sees that Ginobili flopped and injured himself while doing so, is 10 minutes I'll never get back.

Re: Good no-call on Manu’s injury-inducing flop

Blah128guy — Fri, 01 Jul 2011 22:58:15 -0000

Do you understand what I am arguing? I am not arguing that Ginobili did not get injured. Why would I argue that? I am arguing that he did not "injure himself" - as you are contending. And I am right.

He did not injure himself by flopping - as you & the article are contending. Ginobili got injured when he turned and banged knees with Gasol. The jerk/flop was in response to the injury. It did not cause the injury - as you & the article are contending.

Also, flopping is when someone fakes an injury or pretends to be foul. Flopping is not when someone gets hurt and then overreacts to the injury to draw a foul.

Ginobili flops a lot, but this is not an example. He overreacted to the injury - but an injury is an injury. Your characterization of Ginobili as "injuring himself" while flopping is wrong and petty.

Re: Good no-call on Manu’s injury-inducing flop

Staff — Fri, 01 Jul 2011 03:28:57 -0000

You are blind. WATCH THE VIDEO. He is rubbing his knee at the 1:10 mark on the bench in obvious pain, thus injuring himself. Again, you're trying to find another "gotcha" when you aren't very thorough in watching clips all the way through, just like your last lame attempt to find something wrong on another clip when there was nothing wrong.

And if you're trying to say he didn't flop (we have no idea what you're trying to prove), well, you proved our case when you used the words "jerks/flops" in your comment.

Re: Heat-Bulls (Game 1): Some pretty bad calls against both teams, and some sad commentary from Steve Kerr

Staff — Fri, 01 Jul 2011 03:22:40 -0000

I thought you were talking about another video. When we review these comments, it doesn't tell us what videos people are talking about. That said, you're deaf. We are referring to STEVE KERR at the 3:38 mark starting off his drooling with the word "Breathtaking..." Miller's comments were nothing compared to Kerr's drooling. You're in such a rush to try to find a "gotcha" moment, you aren't very thorough in watching and listening to the entire clip. Turns out you're the pissy one, and I bet you can't apologize or admit you're wrong Mr. Mouth Off (using your words, not ours).

Re: Heat-Bulls (Game 1): Some pretty bad calls against both teams, and some sad commentary from Steve Kerr

Blah128guy — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 18:50:09 -0000

You weren't referring to other games.

The fifth bullet point says:
"The refs failed to miss a travel by Derrick Rose, but even worse, TNT announcer Steve Kerr,
while watching the slo-mo replay, fawns all over Rose’s ball handling
abilities — hyping it up — without ever thinking Rose might have
traveled."

The announcer is not Steve Kerr. It is Reggie Miller. Listen to the voice. It is Miller.

You guys are turning out to be just a bunch of pissy fans wanting to mouth off. And you can't admit being wrong.

Re: Good no-call on Manu’s injury-inducing flop

Blah127guy — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 18:36:21 -0000

no, you don't get it. As Ginobili turns, he hits his upper left knee area (thigh; who cares) on Gasol's left knee - WATCH THE VIDEO. Then, Ginobili jerks/flops in response to banging his knee.

Re: Dallas-Miami (NBA Finals Game 2) – Complete ref call analysis: missed travels still the big story

Staff — Mon, 20 Jun 2011 23:15:08 -0000

Yeah, we saw that long ago and responded to another commenter who brought up the same. Our response is still the same -- the written rulebook is the definitive rules. Anything on an NBA.com Web page like this shows how much of a discrepancy there is between the people who write the definitive rules (the written rulebook downloadable at http://nba.com/officiating), and the interpretation of whoever posted this text on a "consumer-facing" page of NBA.com. It could have been anyone from an intern to someone who thinks they know the rules, but doesn't, because they didn't check the real rulebook first. What a mess the NBA documentation is. People aren't checking each other for discrepancies like we are. When in doubt, resort to the "real" rulebook, not some NBA.com web page where an intern, a temp, or a contractor might have written what they thought the rules are.

There are other discrepancies with the so-called video rulebook and the "real" rulebook, like interpretations regarding the restricted area.