This is something
June 6, 2000 5:28 PM   Subscribe

This is something that has been bothering me for the entire NBA playoffs. Watching the Lakers / Blazers series has seriously made me think about this. Portland down 3-1, Lakers come back for a heroic game 7 victory on a Shaq alley-oop? hmmmm... Does this sound fishy to anyone else? Seems more like a script from a Rocky movie than a professional sport. What do you think?
posted by Doomsday (10 comments total)
Well, I don't watch sports, but aren't the reason for those endless cliche' endings because they do actually happen? I mean, it's possible, right?
posted by Ezrael at 6:50 PM on June 6, 2000

I'm wondering about that myself. It looked as if the Knicks gave away their series.
posted by Cavatica at 7:43 PM on June 6, 2000

I was watching that game and that was 100% real-- perhaps the real comment on society is that people are so jaded that everything seems fishy. a lot of it is, i guess
posted by chaz at 8:03 PM on June 6, 2000

I dont think its fishy at all. if you watch sports at all, you know that teams have ups and downs and bursts of adrenaline. its all in the game. Stop worrying about if its fishy or not, trust me, its not.
posted by skizz at 8:20 PM on June 6, 2000

That's exactly what the 1919 chi sox said :)
posted by Mick at 8:51 PM on June 6, 2000

Being a Chicago Bulls fan (a shameful thing these days) I used to hear a lot of this.

Basketball is a game that usually comes down to the final seconds if two teams are evenly matched. While it's rare for a dramatic comeback, it does happen. I watched Mr. Jordan and company come back against an even greater deficit against the Lakers a couple of years ago. When you have extraordinary players on the floor, these things can happen.
posted by aladfar at 9:06 PM on June 6, 2000

see, i don't buy that. I do to a certain extent. But there was one play in particular that was just way too suspicious. Steve Smith driving in to the lane gets hammered by Shaq... no call. Even the announcers were puzzled. If Steve Smith goes to the line and makes 2 free throws, Blazers are up by 3. On the following play, Kobe was fouled and missed both his free throws. Now, Portland has possession with 30 seconds to go up by 3 points. It's a completely different game now. I do agree that Portland choked away a 13 point lead and that was just one play. But it was a crucial play. What about that Miami / NY game 7 where the official said Latrell Sprewell called a timeout? Latrell Sprewell admits to not calling a timeout. So... why did the ref blow the whistle? cuz if he hadn't... Sprewell would have fallen out of bounds giving the ball to Miami for a chance to win the game... that's why.
posted by Doomsday at 10:09 AM on June 7, 2000

I think that it's obvious that big-name players (who don't have a reputation for confronting referees) get away with things that other players don't, which might explain the Shaq no-call.

I remember reading a columnist a few years back referring to the "Patrick Ewing bunny-hop," which I thought summed it up nicely. What travelling?
posted by snarkout at 10:19 AM on June 7, 2000

haha. oh yeah. Travelling is hardly ever called on allstars. What about Shaqs "over the back" rebounds he always grabs. Nice MVP. 30 seconds left in a close game and he sits on the bench cuz he doesn't know how to shoot a basketball.
posted by Doomsday at 11:22 AM on June 7, 2000

well... the funny thing is that Steve Smith IS a big name. Plus, he's probably the nicest guy you'll ever see on a basketball court. Not getting that call is just puzzling. The only reason i can think of is the officials didn't want to ruin the momentum of the Lakers at the time. If the Lakers win the championship this year i'm putting a little asterix beside their name.
posted by Doomsday at 11:25 AM on June 7, 2000

« Older Takes money to make money   |   Hmm. Why am I not surprised? Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments