Sam's 3pt shot!

[4everwarriors]

I was at a Speedway this morning (Friday) getting gas in North Carolina.  They have the pumps with video screens.  They were showing Sam's miracle shot.

Wuz Nads behind da register, hey?

[Lennys Tap]

Lenny

Reminds me of how Al would argue with the refs to put 0.X back on the clock because a half a second could make all the difference. At the time I thought Al was being Al but now I realize he was genius. Attention to detail yields results.

He was always lobbying to get an edge, Crash - and that was indeed part of his genius.

[Lennys Tap]

Who said MU didn't deserve to win? 

I said clearly that without the extra time required for the ref/clock operator to start the clock (probably about 0.2 seconds, which is perfectly normal and standard) Sam wouldn't have gotten the shot off in time, because he took longer than 0.8 seconds in real time from first touch to release.  I said it was normal, not an error.  Not sure what you and Cheeks are even arguing about. 

Based on the information available at the time to the refs, they did nothing wrong and since they called it good on the floor, based on the video evidence they had, the call should have stood.

+1

[Cheeks]

But, it's widely accepted that a human can catch and shoot in .3.  So, you're arguing that a human cannot return to the ground and start a shooting motion in .5.  I'm not convinced.

Incidentally, I'm also not convinced Sam got the shot off in time.

My son and I watched last night again.  The angle from behind Sam, I agree.  The angle from the side where they superimpose the clock, looks like he got it off.  But very very close

[MU82]

Yup, but a human being has to see it, confirm it, press a button, have that signal go to the clock and start.  Let me ask you this, as you watch the replay, do you feel the clock started LATER than what is normal and appropriate for basketball?  We can all agree that the nanosecond the ball touches Hauser the clock doesn't start, but it doesn't ever for any basketball play because this isn't a situation where there is a touchpad in the pool for Michael Phelps to touch in the 100 Meter butterfly. 

I don't see where the clock started any later than it would under normal circumstances, and that should be the measuring stick because that is what is used as the standard in a basketball game.  Until we get to a point where sensors are in bodies and the ball, that's the process.

When his left foot hits the ground, the clock is at .7 or .6 already, tough to tell.  Ref did his job at that point, the clock is the clock once it starts.

Wow, Return of Chicos and/or WarriorDad ... that actually is a reasonable point.

[MU82]

I think the refs did not want to decide the game.

Maybe the refs really were thinking this way, but I hope not.

Folks often use the "refs shouldn't decide the game" argument to suggest that refs shouldn't call a foul with 1 second left in a game.

Because if the ref DOESN'T call an obvious foul, he's not "deciding the game"?

[Bocephys]

Maybe the refs really were thinking this way, but I hope not.

Folks often use the "refs shouldn't decide the game" argument to suggest that refs shouldn't call a foul with 1 second left in a game.

Because if the ref DOESN'T call an obvious foul, he's not "deciding the game"?

It's the basketball version of the trolley problem. Passive inaction seems less terrible that proactive action when someone gets hurt in either scenario.

[WarriorDad]

Wow, Return of Chicos and/or WarriorDad ... that actually is a reasonable point.

I didn't say a word about this topic.

[TheyWereCones]

+1

Going frame by frame as they did on the broadcast, the ball was on his fingertips at 0:00.01 and off at 0:00.00. There was no 0:00.005 frame to differentiate, so you have to go with the call on the floor. Lucky? Probably, but I'll take it.

I think you are overthinking it.  If the ball is off at 0:00.00, the shot is good.  What good would a 0:00.005 frame do?  Even if he was still touching the ball at 0:00.005 (or 0:00.00000000005 for that matter), that doesn't meant he didn't get it off in time.

At any rate I'm just happy they counted it, and I agree with all the posts that said that there wasn't enough video evidence to overturn the call on the court (as fully supported by a 5-page thread of people disagreeing).  The fact that they said it was good originally was huge.

[warriorchick]

I think you are overthinking it. 

All of you are overthinking it. Why can't you simply be happy that the call went our way and move on?

[Marcus92]

Space and time are relative. In the realm of theoretical physics, I believe Sam's shot is possible. Even if it occurred in an alternate dimension.

[war1980rior]

All of you are overthinking it. Why can't you simply be happy that the call went our way and move on?

On the money!  (Thank you!)