Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 35

Thread: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

  1. #1
    Honorary Area 55'er TMJ31's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    4,856

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

    Alright folks,

    First of all, I am opening a new thread because I figured people might avoid last night's postgame thread in the wake of what happened. There was quite a bit of "lively discussion" between myself, and other posters about the final shot of regulation by Amir Johnson. Myself, and another poster firmly stated that we believed it was LATE and should have been disallowed. Others felt differently, and wanted some photographic proof. This thread is my attempt at providing that proof.

    Now let me say first of all, I was watching the game on FSIndiana, and they had several much better and crisper angles during the lengthy replay timeout. Unfortunately, stupid NBA League Pass Broadband (which I had to use to take these screenshots on my computer) was playing the Raptors feed... However, I was still able to get a few shots of some good angles, and hopefully you guys will see where I am going with this. But if anyone has the FSIndiana feed on your DVR, you will be able to see what I mean.

    Secondly, I am NOT interested in debating whether or not the Pacers "Deserved" to lose this game because of mistakes we made, or things we SHOULD have done. This is simply a presentation and discussion of the ruling of this particular field goal.

    Without further ado, I present to you the evidence of (another) game taken from the Pacers by the officials on a final play.


    ANGLE 1: Opposite Baseline




    Ok, so these first two screenshots are from the opposite baseline camera. Of the several angles shown, these are the least conclusive in my opinion, yet they were the ones that the announcers for the Raptors were pointing to as their concrete evidence of a good field goal. As you can see in both of these shots, which are just several frames apart, Amir Johnson appears to have his LEFT hand clear of the ball, but his right thumb and possible the "pad" of his palm still appears to be touching the ball. Again, this is the LEAST conclusive of the three angles. We cannot make a 100% definitive ruling based on this angle alone. Fortunately, we have...



    ANGLE 2: Near Side Baseline

    I am going to break these images down one by one.



    In this first image we see Johnson with BOTH hands clearly still touching the ball. His shooting hand is clearly still supporting the ball from underneath. There are 0.1 seconds on the clock with which he has to get the ball out of his hands.



    As you can see from the shot clock, the time is currently ticking down from 0.1 to 0.0. The game, at this exact moment in time, is OVER. We can see that Johnson has gotten his non-shooting hand clear of the ball, but his right hand, which had to "flick" forward to propel the shot towards the rim, is still in the middle of that motion. His thumb, several fingers and possibly a portion of the pad of his palm are still in contact with the ball as time expires.



    To further drive home the evidence from the second photo, here is a shot from several frames later. His right wrist has now mostly completed its forward "flicking" motion to propel the ball to the rim. Even now, in this shot, it appears as though his index finger at the very least may still be in contact with the ball, several milliseconds AFTER his thumb and several fingers were clearly in contact with the ball.

    This angle definitely shows evidence to support the shot being late. But if you still aren't convinced, here's the magic bullet.



    ANGLE 3: Sideline

    Once again, I'll break these down one at a time.


    Alright, here is the first photo from this angle. Notice first and foremost that ALL the photos from this angle are already showing the basket "shot clock light" already bright red and illuminated. The game is over at this point. In this first picture, we can perhaps assume that Johnson's LEFT hand is still touching the ball, but we've already disproved that in the previous two series of photos. However, we know definitively based on those same first two angles that Johnson's RIGHT hand was at this very moment in time desperately trying to quickly finish its "flicking" shot motion. So here you see the clock EXPIRED and Johnson's "flick" has not yet occurred.



    Several frames have elapsed, and we now see Johnson's RIGHT hand clearly behind his LEFT hand. He is mid-way through his already explained "flick" motion. His LEFT hand is clearly off the ball, while his right fingers are still in the process of giving the ball its final tiny bit of propulsion towards the rim. With his fingers still touching the ball, the game is now at this point most certainly over.



    Alright, now we're getting somewhere. Several frames later we can see Johnson's LEFT hand now fully off the ball. His RIGHT index and middle finger have given the ball their last push towards the rim, but the argument could STILL be made that his ring finger and pinkie finger are still dangerously close to being in contact with the ball, having already established that he was touching it a couple milliseconds ago. Further evidence that this game is REALLY over at this point, 90-88 Pacers.



    FINALLY! A couple frames later and we can at last declare with certainty that Amir Johnson has released the shot. At this point, the game clock has been at 0.0 with red lights on for slightly longer than 0.1, closer to 0.15 or 0.175 in all actuality.



    SO there you have it folks. Is this overkill? Yes. Is it beating a dead horse? Yep. Do I expect for the NBA to come look at this and suddenly reward us with our deserved 'W'. Fat chance!

    However, I do hope that instead of everyone doing nothing but complain about our teams mistakes and things we SHOULD have done, that we may perhaps actually give some validity to the point that sometimes you really DO get a game stolen from you by a blown call. Remember the Denver game? The NBA had to come out and admit fault that time. This should be no different, although I would frankly be shocked if they did.

    We made some mentally and physically tired plays down the stretch of both regulation and overtime. We let this game get away from us when we should have won it going away by double figures. I do not dispute this point. However, despite all of that, when it came down to the end of regulation, the Pacers were winning the game 90-88. Unfortunately, the referees made the cowardly decision that the call was just TOO close, and "aw heck, just let them play 5 more minutes." Some people agree that perhaps that was the "right" way to officiate in that situation. I disagree completely. The NBA rulebook says that if time expires and a player has not fully released the ball at that precise moment, the shot is disallowed. In this situation, NOT enforcing that rule directly lead to the Pacers not instantly claiming a win, and instead the events of overtime took place and we lost.

    Had that rule been enforced by the officials last night, things would have ended OFFICIALLY the way that they should have.

    Pacers 90
    Raptors 88
    Last edited by TMJ31; 02-09-2013 at 04:34 AM.
    Read my Pacers.com Guest Blog:
    "Area 55 Conquers Staples Center"

  2. The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to TMJ31 For This Useful Post:

    + Show/Hide list of the thanked


  3. #2

    Default Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

    The ball is out of his hand in the first two photos. It's close, but you can clearly see the white backboard padding between his fingers, and that would be impossible with the ball still in the pad of his hand. The best angle would have been from the Pacers bench but the top pic is also sufficient.

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to imawhat For This Useful Post:


  5. #3
    pacer fan since 88-89 Mr_Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Indianapolis/Noblesville
    Age
    33
    Posts
    2,502

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

    I think the first pic in angle 3 was the best indication that the shot didn't get off in time. I remember seeing that angle on FSI last night with the red backboard light on and was convinced it the shot was gonna count. Great analysis.
    And the walls came tumbling down.....

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Mr_Smith For This Useful Post:


  7. #4
    Member Pacertron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Maine
    Age
    30
    Posts
    137

    Default Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

    I agree with you TMJ, I feel now just like I felt last night that the shot was no good. The basic issue here was that the refs called the shot good on the floor. In order to overturn that they need conclusive evidence to do so. And with the replays as close as they were, not conclusive enough to overturn the call. That's all it boils down to. I think it was late, and in my head we should have won the game on that basis. We still made some boneheaded plays. I was fuming last night, but time to move on to the next one.

  8. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Pacertron For This Useful Post:


  9. #5

    Default Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

    Quote Originally Posted by Pacertron View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I agree with you TMJ, I feel now just like I felt last night that the shot was no good. The basic issue here was that the refs called the shot good on the floor. In order to overturn that they need conclusive evidence to do so. And with the replays as close as they were, not conclusive enough to overturn the call. That's all it boils down to. I think it was late, and in my head we should have won the game on that basis. We still made some boneheaded plays. I was fuming last night, but time to move on to the next one.
    One wonders if a "no good" call would have stood up upon review; likely yes - again, due to insufficient evidence to overturn. I suspect that refs are inclined (even trained?) not to make a "no good" call in end-of-game shots just as they are inclined not to call end-of-game fouls. (Except in Denver. )
    "I'd run through a brick wall for that man."
    - Roy Hibbert on playing for Coach Frank Vogel

  10. #6

    Default Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

    not trying to be a dick, but you need a bigger TV to see the space. The Pacers played the officials replay on the overhead scoreboard and you could clearly see the space between the hand and the ball at the moment the light went off. It was the first set of views. Now the screen at the Fieldhouse is, what, 50 ft long? So the space is easier to see. The other views are not clear, but the first view on a big enough screen clearly shows that he got the ball off.

  11. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to xIndyFan For This Useful Post:


  12. #7

    Default Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

    I will not be surprised if The League decides the call was missed, just like Denver, but will not result in a W for the Pacers, just like Denver. Apologies cost nothing!

  13. #8
    Remember #31 dohman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    1,333

    Default Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

    Its amazing how close our losses are. Jazz Game, Denver Game, and now this game come to mind. All int he hands of the officials and each time we get the shaft. As Ron Washington said I guess that's just the way basketball goes..

  14. #9
    Running with the Big Boys BillS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Danberry
    Age
    55
    Posts
    11,555

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default

    Serious question - is the rule that the shooting motion portion of the hand must have released or is it that no portion of the hand may be touching? I ask because it is almost always stated in terms of whether or not the ball was released, and this analysis seems to turn on a couple of fingers still touching after the motion was completed but the light had not come on - and that last is important, it is the light and not the clock digits that matters.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2
    BillS

    "Every time I pitched it was like throwing gasoline on a fire. Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw! Pkkw!"
    - Ebby Calvin "Nuke" LaLoosh

  15. #10

    Default Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

    I cant tell with the shot, but I turned this game on with 5 minutes to go and saw at 3 atrocious calls go against the Pacers and about 2 no calls that should have been called. I was furious. I think they took David West out of the game mentally. I think that's why he made such a boneheaded pass at the end there.

  16. #11
    Member Phree Refill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Columbus IN
    Age
    27
    Posts
    560

    Default Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

    I would like to see a reply of Toronto's steal of David west's inbounds pass. From the one or two times I've seen it in real time it looked like it was very very close to being a back court violation on Toronto.

  17. #12

    Default Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

    Quote Originally Posted by BillS View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Serious question - is the rule that the shooting motion portion of the hand must have released or is it that no portion of the hand may be touching? I ask because it is almost always stated in terms of whether or not the ball was released, and this analysis seems to turn on a couple of fingers still touching after the motion was completed but the light had not come on - and that last is important, it is the light and not the clock digits that matters.

    Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk 2
    The rule, as I understand it, is hand touching the ball. If the hand touches the ball after the light goes on, then the game is over. The motion of the hand off the ball doesn't matter as long as the ball is not touched.

  18. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to xIndyFan For This Useful Post:


  19. #13
    Child Of Scorn MnvrChvy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    419

    Default Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

    I'm not mad about this call. To me, it came down to what they called at the time of the play because the replays were not 100% convincing. In this kind of situation, I think it's better for the refs to assume the play was good and then to challenge that ruling. Benefit of the doubt should go to the offense.

    Give them credit, they made tough plays at the end while the Pacers just had a couple slip ups. It was a really fun game to watch, and though I'm bummed about not getting the W, I was thoroughly entertained. I wish I could have been at the Fieldhouse. Frankly, if we had to lose one of these games, I'm glad it was the Toronto game.

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to MnvrChvy For This Useful Post:


  21. #14

    Default

    Butt post sorry
    Last edited by Dgreenwell3; 02-09-2013 at 11:49 AM.

  22. #15
    .
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    52,583

    Default Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

    Quote Originally Posted by imawhat View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The ball is out of his hand in the first two photos. It's close, but you can clearly see the white backboard padding between his fingers, and that would be impossible with the ball still in the pad of his hand. The best angle would have been from the Pacers bench but the top pic is also sufficient.
    Yep. The first two photos are the angle I saw on a 650" screen in front of me at the Fieldhouse (I sit almost center court, row 1 in balcony). It was barely, and I mean BARELY, out of his hand. The best argument left is that maybe it was touching his thumb, but considering how one shoots a basketball, I find that unlikely (typically your thumb is as far back as any other part of the hand, if not even a little further back than the fingers). If I want to be super devil's advocate in favor of the Pacers, I would say that it's too close to overturn the ruling (which would mean there's some wiggle room to the interpretation of the replay), but I think they ultimately got it right.

    I don't like it, but that's what I see.

  23. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Hicks For This Useful Post:


  24. #16
    RING THE BELL! Sandman21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Area55
    Posts
    6,312

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

    Quote Originally Posted by Foul on Smits View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I cant tell with the shot, but I turned this game on with 5 minutes to go and saw at 3 atrocious calls go against the Pacers and about 2 no calls that should have been called. I was furious. I think they took David West out of the game mentally. I think that's why he made such a boneheaded pass at the end there.
    Two words: Bennett. Salvatore.
    "Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

    "And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "
    Want your own "Just Say No to Kamen" from @mkroeger pic? http://twitpic.com/a3hmca

  25. The Following User Says Thank You to Sandman21 For This Useful Post:


  26. #17

    Default Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

    He got it off.

  27. #18

    Default Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

    That's about as close as a call as you could get. So it all comes down to what was ruled on the court; if they had initially ruled no basket, I'm certain it would've stood as called as well.

    The NBA won't be issuing any apology because one isn't necessary.

  28. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to bunt For This Useful Post:


  29. #19

    Default Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

    Quote Originally Posted by TMJ31 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Unfortunately, the referees made the cowardly decision that the call was just TOO close, and "aw heck, just let them play 5 more minutes." Some people agree that perhaps that was the "right" way to officiate in that situation. I disagree completely. The NBA rulebook says that if time expires and a player has not fully released the ball at that precise moment, the shot is disallowed. In this situation, NOT enforcing that rule directly lead to the Pacers not instantly claiming a win, and instead the events of overtime took place and we lost.

    Had that rule been enforced by the officials last night, things would have ended OFFICIALLY the way that they should have.

    Pacers 90
    Raptors 88
    The rulebook also says "Clear and conclusive visual evidence needed to overturn original call by officials."

    The officials don't have the time or ability to freeze frame the shot from 4 different angles. And even if they did, you still have to squint your eyes to see what you want to see.

  30. The Following User Says Thank You to bunt For This Useful Post:


  31. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Lifelong Indy-area resident
    Age
    62
    Posts
    4,654

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

    I am in the camp that the ball was released from Johnson's hand by the time the backboard light came on.

    But, if we can honestly sit here and look at these photos and see different things, that just tells you how close the call was to begin with. And as such, once the call was made on the floor, can everyone agree that without an additional review being conclusive one way or the other (as evidenced by our differing opinions), it is not likely at all that the officials were going to overrule the original call?

    It would have been great if the call were overturned. But I honestly cannot argue it one way or the other. The real shame in this happening is that it was totally avoidable had we simply used our smarts and taken better care of the basketball. So, any way you choose to look at it, the onus is on us.

  32. #21
    100 Miles from the B count55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    5,772

    Default Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

    Sitting on opposite baseline press row, we all thought it was good in real time. Then, when they showed the baseline angle on the big board directly above us, you could see Amir had his left hand off the ball (to the side, which why it looks like it is touching it from the side angle) and that he had released the ball with his right. It was an odd motion...somewhere between a tip and a shot...because during slo-mo replay, it looked like it would be no way he wouldn't be touching it, but then he wasn't, and then the red lights came on.

    The shot was out of his hand in time, and the call was right, both in real time and on the replay.

  33. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to count55 For This Useful Post:


  34. #22
    Member Miller_time04's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Martinsville
    Age
    25
    Posts
    1,304
    Mood

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

    Yeah I was at the game, it really looked good. I said it was good before seeing any replays and then stood behind that thought when I did see replays.

  35. #23

    Default Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

    It was crystal clear at the BiLF that the shot was good. The person who robbed the Pacers of a victory was David West. I love West and he had a great overall game, but that was an epic mistake with a timeout left.

    I appreciate and applaud your efforts, however.

  36. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to FlavaDave For This Useful Post:


  37. #24
    Headband and Rec Specs rexnom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    New Haven, CT
    Posts
    8,751

    Default Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

    I just don't see it. Sorry, man. Tough call that was called correctly.

  38. #25
    Honorary Area 55'er TMJ31's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    4,856

    Sports Logo Sports Logo Sports Logo

    Default Re: FINAL SCORE: Pacers 90 - Raptors 88 Screenshot Analysis Inside

    Quote Originally Posted by BillS View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Serious question - is the rule that the shooting motion portion of the hand must have released or is it that no portion of the hand may be touching? I ask because it is almost always stated in terms of whether or not the ball was released, and this analysis seems to turn on a couple of fingers still touching after the motion was completed but the light had not come on - and that last is important, it is the light and not the clock digits that matters.
    The rule, and my position when showing these photos, was that once the clock reaches 0.0 and the red lights illuminate, if even ONE teeny-tiny portion of a finger, hand, thumb, whatever is touching the ball for any reason the game is OVER and the shot is disallowed. It's not like in football where you can finish the final play if time expires (Not insinuating you thought that, but it's just an example)

    Quote Originally Posted by MnvrChvy View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I'm not mad about this call. To me, it came down to what they called at the time of the play because the replays were not 100% convincing. In this kind of situation, I think it's better for the refs to assume the play was good and then to challenge that ruling. Benefit of the doubt should go to the offense.
    I can totally respect your opinion here, but I completely disagree. Why? Because in this day and age we DO have replay available. If a shot is honestly THIS close, then yes, the refs should be looking at it from 4 different angles for as long as it takes to make the correct call. Which they did not do last night. As a result, the Pacers did not immediately get a "W" and instead we had to deal with an overtime, and it just wasn't our night. But all that would have been avoided had they not given them the "benefit of the doubt." That is why I was so upset about this.
    Read my Pacers.com Guest Blog:
    "Area 55 Conquers Staples Center"

Similar Threads

  1. 11/24/2009 Guess The Score - Pacers at Raptors
    By RoboDoug in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 11-25-2009, 12:58 AM
  2. .500 finish is very attainable. Schedule analysis inside.
    By Phree Refill in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 145
    Last Post: 04-16-2009, 09:56 AM
  3. 02/23/2007 Guess The Score - Pacers at Raptors
    By RoboDoug in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 02-23-2007, 09:27 PM
  4. 03/12/2006 Guess The Score - Pacers at Raptors
    By RoboDoug in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 03-13-2006, 10:22 AM
  5. 12/30/2005 Guess The Score - Pacers vs. Raptors
    By RoboDoug in forum Indiana Pacers
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 12-30-2005, 09:54 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •