The NBA is rigged

[AzStevenCal]

Paul traveled. Didn’t see a foul there after watching the replay a few times.

Didn’t review the Payne out of bounds

No call on clear Bridges foul on Mann layup

On the flip side Book was fouled by Jackson and the Saric loose ball foul was atrocious. Bottom line is it’s not rigged they just suck at officiating.

It looks to me like Beverley swiped across CP's face although Paul's reaction might be staged so can't tell for sure. Also, Paul is starting to fall (no travel yet) and there's contact to his leg prior to him lifting his pivot foot. But the reason it got called is the same reason Bridges was called for a foul instead of giving him the steal. The refs know the situation, they know that it's smart for us to foul on that play and they know the Clippers will want to foul on the CP play so they are influenced by the situation. Those are no-brainer calls.

 

[Lorenzo]

NBA is not rigged. everything is aligning for you guys. you have an awesome young team that is ahead of schedule. and that is a great thing, it doesn't happen very often. tonight the LAC fans are the ones whining about refs.

enjoy this run the suns are 1 win away from the finals. these clippers without KL cannot come back in this series in my opinion. I'd be surprised if they can win another game.

 

[GatorAZ]

It looks to me like Beverley swiped across CP's face although Paul's reaction might be staged so can't tell for sure. Also, Paul is starting to fall (no travel yet) and there's contact to his leg prior to him lifting his pivot foot. But the reason it got called is the same reason Bridges was called for a foul instead of giving him the steal. The refs know the situation, they know that it's smart for us to foul on that play and they know the Clippers will want to foul on the CP play so they are influenced by the situation. Those are no-brainer calls.

Anticipation calls are tough but players/coaches are usually alerting the refs of an upcoming foul so it’s hard to put it all on then.

 

[Ronin]

NBA is not rigged. everything is aligning for you guys. you have an awesome young team that is ahead of schedule. and that is a great thing, it doesn't happen very often. tonight the LAC fans are the ones whining about refs.

enjoy this run the suns are 1 win away from the finals. these clippers without KL cannot come back in this series in my opinion. I'd be surprised if they can win another game.

Tread lightly.

You must be registered for see images

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

No review on the Payne out of bounds at the end. Then Paul travels but they call a foul instead. Referees were all Phoenix in this game, especially in the 4th. Still think it's rigged? This is the stupidest thread of all time.

They also fouled book out despite Reggie’s arm being surgically imbedded as a part of book’s chest. And by my count there were 5 separate times George got away with his patented fully extended arm push off on offense. You got your’s.

 

[JCSunsfan]

It's not rigged. Bad calls went both ways.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Paul traveled. Didn’t see a foul there after watching the replay a few times.

Didn’t review the Payne out of bounds

No call on clear Bridges foul on Mann layup

On the flip side Book was fouled by Jackson and the Saric loose ball foul was atrocious. Bottom line is it’s not rigged they just suck at officiating.

this. Continuing to say it’s rigged after we got the benefit of the doubt on a lot of calls tonight just doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. The refs and league could have VERY easily swung this game to the Clippers if this was rigged.

 

[NashDishesDimes]

Last 2 reviews terrible:

1. bridges/zubac out of bounds - 2 views showed two different things clearly. Should have stayed jump ball

2. Dbook offensive foul they could have given the foul to reggie in the review

the cam pyne play everyone complaining about - i bet after they reviewed the similar Dbook play a couple days ago the league probably told the refs not to review those. Because if you start reviewing every time a player knocks ball out of other players hands thats impossible to officiate in real time and its been called the offensive players ball for 100 years.

this game was officiated in favor of clipps

 

[JCSunsfan]

Last 2 reviews terrible:

1. bridges/zubac out of bounds - 2 views showed two different things clearly. Should have stayed jump ball

2. Dbook offensive foul they could have given the foul to reggie in the review

the cam pyne play everyone complaining about - i bet after they reviewed the similar Dbook play a couple days ago the league probably told the refs not to review those. Because if you start reviewing every time a player knocks ball out of other players hands thats impossible to officiate in real time and its been called the offensive players ball for 100 years.

this game was officiated in favor of clipps

It was an offensive foul on Book. Clearly.

 

[Hoop Head]

It was an offensive foul on Book. Clearly.

Book fouled Beverly but that was after he was fouled by Reggie Jackson. If a change was made to the ruling on the court, it should have been to switch it to foul on Jackson.

 

[sdscard4]

The Clippers set this tone...they should accept the consequences

 

[95pro]

On books charge, he should have done more damage to Beverly

 

[Mainstreet]

After tonight's game I'm more inclined to rename the thread, "The NBA is rugged."

The playoffs have been tough on players and fans alike.

 

[pokerface]

Fight me on this

Oh I'm fighting you alright. Blown calls by the refs doesn't equal rigged. And as we saw on game 4 blown calls go both ways in a series. As far as big market teams getting all the calls...prove it. The NBA has exploded in franchise value..Teams aren't going to risk billions of dollars in value over some petty ratings that could be exposed easily. There is no league wide ref conspiracy...just isn't there.

This thread is debunked and dismantled. When the Suns win it all it will be LEGITIMATE.

 

[Dback Jon]

It was an offensive foul on Book. Clearly.

If you just look at Beverly. But he got fouled by Jackson before he ran into Beverly

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

If you just look at Beverly. But he got fouled by Jackson before he ran into Beverly

Before and during. It was a quick reach in. His arm was firmly planted in books chest for the entire ride.

 

[JCSunsfan]

Book fouled Beverly but that was after he was fouled by Reggie Jackson. If a change was made to the ruling on the court, it should have been to switch it to foul on Jackson.

They were not reviewing that foul. They were reviewing the blocking foul. That was the foul that was called and challenged. They cannot call a previous foul on a review.

 

[Chaplin]

They were not reviewing that foul. They were reviewing the blocking foul. That was the foul that was called and challenged. They cannot call a previous foul on a review.

Pretty sure that’s not entirely true.

 

[AzStevenCal]

They were not reviewing that foul. They were reviewing the blocking foul. That was the foul that was called and challenged. They cannot call a previous foul on a review.

I don't really know but I do know that I've heard the announcers say that they can. It's been brought up several times this postseason. Announcers don't always get the rules right though so make of it what you will.

 

[Chaplin]

I don't really know but I do know that I've heard the announcers say that they can. It's been brought up several times this postseason. Announcers don't always get the rules right so take it for what it's worth.

Right. Think about a situation exactly like this, what if someone pushed Book into Beverley? Could they not call that foul because they are only reviewing the Beverley one, as JC is saying?

In this case, Book definitely charged Beverley, but they probably didn’t think there was enough to call anything on Jackson.

The reasoning Ouchie keeps using—Jackson’s hand was on his chest the whole way—actually defines what a foul is, so I’m not sure why he’s using that as justification of why it’s NOT a foul.

 

[gimpy]

I don’t think there is anything “definite” about any of this.

 

[AzStevenCal]

Right. Think about a situation exactly like this, what if someone pushed Book into Beverley? Could they not call that foul because they are only reviewing the Beverley one, as JC is saying?

In this case, Book definitely charged Beverley, but they probably didn’t think there was enough to call anything on Jackson.

The reasoning Ouchie keeps using—Jackson’s hand was on his chest the whole way—actually defines what a foul is, so I’m not sure why he’s using that as justification of why it’s NOT a foul.

Actually that was one of the problems when they first started allowing challenges. It made for some awkward situations where they'd review a play, realize the challenger was technically correct and were forced by rule to change the call even though the challenging side was clearly in the wrong - or the player was out of bounds when it happened (those kind of things). Initially they were only allowed to review specific decisions or questions and they were allowed no leeway to consider anything else that occurred.

As for the hand on Booker's chest, maybe I read Ouchie wrong but I thought he was agreeing that there was a previous foul leading up to the offensive contact?

 

[Mainstreet]

Actually that was one of the problems when they first started allowing challenges. It made for some awkward situations where they'd review a play, realize the challenger was technically correct and were forced by rule to change the call even though the challenging side was clearly in the wrong - or the player was out of bounds when it happened (those kind of things). Initially they were only allowed to review specific decisions or questions and they were allowed no leeway to consider anything else that occurred.

As for the hand on Booker's chest, maybe I read Ouchie wrong but I thought he was agreeing that there was a previous foul leading up to the offensive contact?

The announcers, for what they were worth, said they could review the previous play which was a foul.

 

[AzStevenCal]

The announcers, for what they were worth, said they could review the previous play which was a foul.

Yes, I know. I've heard them say it many times throughout this postseason. And I know the rules on what they can look at has changed but I'm just not sure to what extent. Can they only overcall if they see something that caused the foul to occur or can they look at all action during the play or possession?

 

[Chaplin]

Actually that was one of the problems when they first started allowing challenges. It made for some awkward situations where they'd review a play, realize the challenger was technically correct and were forced by rule to change the call even though the challenging side was clearly in the wrong - or the player was out of bounds when it happened (those kind of things). Initially they were only allowed to review specific decisions or questions and they were allowed no leeway to consider anything else that occurred.

As for the hand on Booker's chest, maybe I read Ouchie wrong but I thought he was agreeing that there was a previous foul leading up to the offensive contact?

I took it the opposite, that if they didn’t call it before, they weren’t going to call it then.