I love the guy, but I took great satisfaction in seeing him argue that the final shot shouldn't have counted. Funny stuff.

The irony is that, not only was it clearly before the buzzer, but Dice also wasn't in the cylinder. It was ABSOLUTELY a good shot.

Unlike some others I've seen.

Our electricity went out and I missed the end of the game!

definitely wasn't offensive interference. but without replay available to them, you can't really complain about him arguing it.

it was kinda like how the entire spurs team and coaching staff argued .4

.4 was just pure dumb luck. duncan's shot right before that was superior.

Agree with previous poster. Fisher's 0.4 shot was pure luck. Duncan's shot before that was as difficult a shot in a pressure situation as any that came before. Duncan's shot would have been remembered as one of the most clutch playoff shot off time had it not been for Fisher's basket.

The issue with .4 was they didn't start the clock immediately. If you have .4 you are only supposed to be able to tip it or at most grab and shoot. On .4 Fisher caught the ball facing the end line, landed on the ground, then took a quick jump shot the other way. That isn't physically possible in .4. However, the official didn't start the clock when Fisher grabbed the ball but rather about the time he landed and was going up for the shot and gave him the extra tenths of a second he needed to get the shot off. Still a great shot, but it didn't happen in .4.

I think the greater point is though that Fisher should never, ever argue an end of game issue against the Spurs for the rest of his career because of that. That shot cost SA a ring.

you do realize the spurs would've had to beat a very very good pistons team. it cost them POSSIBLY a shot at a ring at best.


and i'm sure the SA shot clock person was dead on since the same was a home game for the spurs. clock stuff always favors the home team.

you're making excuses. the rule is the rule. catch and shoot is allowed above .3. the problem is that god hates the spurs

[This message has been edited by Simplebay (edited 2/4/2011 10:56a).]

aggie93 pretty much sums it up for me. Its like somebody winning the lottery and then complaining about the tax burden.

quote:

---

clock stuff always favors the home team.

---

This is pure, unadultered denial. Go back and watch the replay. The clock didn't get started on time. Although I agree with you that all the "cost them a title" talk is pretty premature. Spurs fans generally assume that the Spurs would go on to win another one against the Lakers and then go win 4 out of 7 against the Pistons, who pretty much spanked the Lakers. Pretty bold assumption.

[This message has been edited by MassAggie97 (edited 2/4/2011 10:59a).]

it's a stupid argument. because Duncan's shot went through the net and at least another .4 of the second went off the clock (go watch). but human reaction time for the ref to stop the clock made up for the difference. that cancels out the human reaction time for the button to be pressed after fisher caught the ball. rules state the clock should've been stopped at .9, as this picture shows



i've argued this countlessly with ignorant spurs fans. what happened was fair and justified. there is no controversy outside of the spurs fanbase.


The Pistons were a team with damn good players in their prime.

the lakers were more talented hired hitmen with 0 of 4 hall of famers in their prime.

quote:

---

the problem is that god hates the spurs

---

You can say that about a lot of teams (the mavs come to mind), but not a team that has 4 rings.

quote:

---

there is no controversy outside of the spurs fanbase.

---

You mean there was no controversy on the side of the winning team? Well I'll be!

media outlets sharkie.

most media pundits were like holy eff what a fanfreakingtastic shot, dagger, etc.

not...my god what a travesty the spurs were robbed, the nba needs to change the rules.

why would there be? they hate the spurs. the media darling lakers beating perennial annoyance spurs on their homecourt? they're all over that

All I know is that the replay verified McDyess's tip and Fisher cried all the way to the locker room. Plus, Barkley looked like he swallowed a turd when TNT went back to the studio. GoSpursGo!!!

Didn't someone on here break down the .4 shot frame by frame? It was determined that it should have counted. Fisher caught, turned and shot in one fluid motion. The moral of the story is you can't let a left handed guy catch the ball in that position. It was perfect and the only way anyone gets that shot off. Although it would have been interesting to see what the result would be today now that the refs can go back and look at the replay.

And if the Spurs win that game, they absolutely win that series. Remember the Pistons beat the Lakers but that's only because Malone went down with the knee injury and didn't play in the Finals. A healthy Spurs (or Lakers) would have stopped the Pistons. I truly believe that.

I'm not a big fan of the what if game and I don't like to make excuses for my team, but I also believe the Spurs would have won it all that year if not for that shot.

Also, that boneheaded foul on Dirk in 06 cost us a trip to the finals. I won't say it cost us the championship, but I think most would agree they probably would not have collapsed like the Mavs did.

Crazy how the spurs could have been back-to-back-to-back-to-back-to-back champions if those two moments had gone a little differently.

Then again, Horry doesn't go off in game 5 against the Pistons and it's a whole nother story as well.

One could do this for hours.

Just had to remind me of the Dirk foul in game 7. I agree that the Spurs would not have collapsed like Dallas did.

If you want to talk about the Dallas series in 06, I could go on forever about the horrible calls in that series, but I'll go with the short version for now. Yes, Manu did foul Dirk at the end of regulation, with 12 or so seconds remaining.

About 8 seconds later, though, Dirk hacked Duncan hard across the forearms to keep him from dunking it (a BLATANTLY obvious foul) that the refs ignored (perhaps to 'let the players decide the game,' though they called Manu's foul 8 seconds earlier). If they had called it, overtime probably wouldn't even have happened, and I think the Spurs would have taken the Heat out in the Finals.

If Lebron's momma woulda gotten preggers a year earlier, the Rockets would have had LBJ

Simple,

The refs looked at the clock after both Duncan's shot and Fisher's shot and decided there was .4 after Duncan's shot and that Fisher's shot counted. Problem was, by rule they can only go off what the clock said.

The "home court timer" also shows your ignorance. On that play the clock was started by a ref who pushes a button he has with him and not by the regular clock person. The problem with all of it was when the clock started. You can't catch a pass, land, turn, and shoot in .4. It matters because the defense on Fisher was set to force him to have to catch the ball facing out of bounds which would make it impossible to get the shot off.

Still, the greater point is Fisher should never, ever argue an end of game timer issue for the rest of his life.

quote:

---

Also, that boneheaded foul on Dirk in 06 cost us a trip to the finals.

---

a) There's no doubt it was a foul, but I'm not sure it was an "end of the game in the playoffs" kind of foul. I was surprised it got called in that situation.
b) Ginobili was the reason they were in that game in the first place. Live with the hustle, die by the hustle.

i know i started a thread about this already, but this simplebay dud is a complete and total idiot.