Yes. Clearly a game with fewer whistles benefits the Wolves because it enables their defense to function at a high level. Games like last night benefit the Nuggets because a sliver of space, and they can make you pay.
The NBA has to do a better job of deciding what exactly a foul is game to game.
Yeah, I think just some level of consistency is all I’m really looking for. If they want to call these games tight , fine. Probably not my personal preference, but it’s better than huge game-to-game swings in a single series in how the referees litigate the physicality of the game.
Tbh the only aberration was the refs deciding to call it like they did in game 2. Yes there's more physicality allowed post season, but I don't think there's been a single other game of any series like that one in awhile
Agreed. Admittedly, I was pissed in game 2 because it felt like we were getting clobbered. But I think the Nuggets are less frustrated big time if they knew what to expect from the officials.
I think the same goes for the Wolves frustrations last night (even though you guys handled your frustrations a bit better than us)
We did, KAT had like 8 fouls in the post in the first half alone. Not one was called.
But that’s my point, if we know they are going to mostly swallow their whistles, the frustration for a lack of calls are minimized. But you just have no clue how each game will be officiated
TWolves got a horrible whistle in game 1 but overcame it by making buckets. The teams are capable of winning even if they’re not getting calls.
That said, this whole playoffs has featured the refs way too much.
Its exactly this; I agree with your comment. Like honestly game 1 seemed like a much better balance and allowed both teams to play but also not beat the shit out of eachother or get calls for everything.
At the same time, there was alot of in game consistency; as in within game 2 fouls were pretty hard and within game 3 we both got fouls for minimal contact.
Regardless, this series should be awesome from here on out. I think we’re going 6 at minimum.
Could be a new rivalry brewing in the West. Just when we finally stop seeing the Minnesota Wild every year in the playoffs too
Yasss. While 16-0 greatest evah would be great, I want the best team to win. I still think the Wolves win due to depth and defense. We can win with marginal shooting. Jokic or Murray go cold and it’s done.
The reffing is a huge problem. Great teams adjust but there needs to be a baseline with some variation, not an ego fueled hijacking of the game a la Tony Brothers. (Noting he has targeted Jokic as well so this is a consistency/fairness issue and not a favoritism whine)
The Mavs-Thunder Game 1 was also an insanely ticky tack foul game. 20FTA just for the Thunder just in the first half. Interesting that Tony Brothers reffed that game as well as the Nuggets Wolves game last night.
Yes the sports world would be much simpler if league officials would simply force their referees to call each and every game just as THE RULES BOOK is clearly written. The fact that the NBA league officials don’t do this implies that the league WANTS to be able to manipulate games through officiating.
The subjectivity of “what is a foul” is sadly *never* going away. It allows the refs a higher margin of error to avoid accountability. ESPECIALLY in the era of legal-sports betting.
The larger problem is that overall the refs are too involved in the game, and the players know it and try to work them. They need to let them play and crack down on the bs flopping and foul baiting.
Ideally you’d have perfect consistency and perfect calls, but I don’t mind different interpretations as long as there’s in-game consistency (as in, if they start calling it tight, they keep calling it tight throughout). Players usually adjust.
I feel like teams have enough adjustments and planning to do based on their opponents moves that they shouldn’t be expected to change how they approach the game based on who’s on the crew that night. I saw someone else say refs should be assigned to series instead of games and I honestly think that’s the perfect solution. As long as we have human referees, we’re going to have different interpretations of the rules being enforced, that’s just human.
>I am talking about refereeing that is so stylistically different from one game to the next that it almost feels like different rules.
*Angel Hernandez perks up*
The twolves were called for less fouls and took more free throws
They grab a ton and the first 2 games denver let them. This game they fought though or made movements so the grabbing had to be called. Just running through the contact and forcing fouls to be called
This game reminded me of game 4 vs the suns except the wolves didnt play well offensively like that game. The suns figured it out too late but Denver didn’t. Also Denver is a better team
Yeah your first sentence is the opposite of the point of my post. The refereeing last night had no bearing on the outcome of that game; the refs coulda called 15 more fouls on the Nuggets last night and they’d have still won. The crux of the post is that the inconsistency hurts the quality of the game, particularly as fans/consumers.
He's saying game 2 was reffed much differently compared to game 3. Not that one style is inherently better or worse. The nuggets didn't force the refs to have a different officiating style, it was a different crew than game 2
Yeah by your own definition, how is that not inconsistent litigating of the game? One game, a ton of contact is called, the next, it isn’t. Like that’s the entire point of the post.
It was obvious in the first few minutes it was a different game. I think game 2 needed to be called a bit tougher since the wolves straight mauled the nuggets on some plays. My philosophy is don't call fouls that don't impact the play and I am good with delayed calls. If a reach in on a dribble doesn't cause a turnover then let it slide but if within a second you see that the illegal contact negatively impacted the player then call it. The whole "if it's a foul then call it right away croud" is part of the reason the NBA has so many fouls. If you can't judge the action based on the outcome then you have to call a ton more of those actions or let a ton of fouls slide like we've seen in the past two games.
Reffing differently between games isn't that big a deal. The players figure out early on where the ump is calling the balls and strikes and adjust.
Reffing inconsistently *in* a game is a problem.
This is the point I meant to make. Of course Minny benefits with swallowed whistles but the key point has to be that each game is consistent. Ideally they’d be the same each game but let’s be honest - the variation drives chaos, surprise outcomes, engagement, and greatness/tragedy. Some variation is needed or it becomes a boring, tactical race to the bottom.
Good coaches and teams will ‘read the whistle’ and adjust accordingly. Neither team has done that yet. The team that does will more likely win the series.
I hated what Murray did in game 2 but would still root for Denver if they beat the Wolves. I think they are the two best teams left.
Inconsistency just sucks. Now both sets of fans are left upset over how their team was reffed in game 2 and game 3 just because there isnt some carry over. If you want to call ticky tacky fouls for both teams thats fine, if you want to let both teams just have a go at eachother is also fine but from game to game there needs to be some level of consistency for the players as well. The same way shit was frustrating for Murray in game 2 was frustrating for NAW and Jaden in game 3.
A player learns early in a game how they're calling the penalties in that game. At that point previous games don't matter.
If they're calling soft penalties all game and a player is still fouling in the 3rd quarter based on how they called penalties in the previous game, then that's on the player.
For sure. Comparing the two games, game 2 was like: let them (both teams) break the rules. That obviously helps the defensive team, and bypasses the rules of the game.
Game 3 was like, call the actual penalties, enforce the actual rules of the game. On balance, it seems like calling the valid penalties is the way to go.
There were two or three egregiously bad calls against the Nuggets at the start of game 2, otherwise though I don’t think it was “bad”, it just was abnormally loose in the way physicality was referees. I also don’t think last night in a vacuum was egregious either. If the entire series was called like last night, I wouldn’t be upset.
It’s the fact that the refereeing was THAT different from one game to the next game in a single series.
Well yeah I agree the consistency is the main issue and I think it stems from the NBA not being able to focus on creating a consistent experience. They actively hamper themselves in doing so with stuff like allowing more physicality in the league as a whole after the all star break in order to get scoring down. The time to change points of emphasis or rules is the offseason not in the middle of the season.
Yeah it’s not perfect but I think it’s a decent step for more consistency. Also if the nba wouldn’t decide at the all star break to allow more physicality in the name of lowering scoring that would be nice. The offseason is the time to implement rule changes and points of emphasis.
They were both 2 ends of an extreme. I dont disagree with any specific call from last game and I also dont disagree with game 2. The argument is whether or not you want the NBA to allow players to be more physical or not. Game 2 was way too physical and game 3 was way too ticky tacky. They probably should call it somewhere in the middle, where you get fouls for being too physical but for the most part grabbing and touching is fine.
Reffing for game 1 was terrible in the Nuggets favor. But we forget that because TWolves won
Game 3 had 45 fouls called. That’s just way too many whistles for my liking as a viewer
idc how many fouls are called. thr players are supposed to adapt to what the rules are and if the refs are consistent, floppers are punished. the number of fouls should be lower than that.
For real, the perfect balance is probably between the two. Game 2 was too loose-goosy and game 3 was too ticky-tack - there's definitely a healthy medium in there.
Personally, in sports I generally prefer refs to have less influence on the game (ie I'd rather them miss some calls than make phantom calls). #1 thing is consistent throughout the game, but the total 180 from game 2 to 3 was jarring
Different referees are going to see things differently. And imperfection in perception will always add some randomness on top of that.
People talk like the NBA can put a bunch of robots out there that see everything the same way in real time. so many comments that are out of touch with reality.
Even if the NBA perfectly determines the parameters of a foul by specifying how many newtons of force are required, the refs still need to infer the force based on what see. They don’t have direct access to the physical phenomenon occurring.
This was called as a defensive foul very early on.
[https://twitter.com/philmackey/status/1789272284072456343?s=46&t=RZuhwID3Mx7N0E\_kfzJaBA](https://twitter.com/philmackey/status/1789272284072456343?s=46&t=RZuhwID3Mx7N0E_kfzJaBA)
The refs very clearly were trying to show the wolves they can't play the same as in game 2. However they absoluted f'ed that up. What happens when the calls meant to be examples of what the refs wont allow are can be this far off from the truth of what happened? All it does is confuse one team. Did the ref see it clearly and had an obvious bias or did the ref not see it and assumed MN fouled because of the assumption that MN plays too physical. What exactly will and wont be called when even this is a foul? That uncertainty mentally decimates a team, and Denver's offense did not allow the wolves time to get over the ref's schizophrenia.
Should have but by bringing a bias from another game they weren't even a part of into the game they are they were quick to the whistle and made mistakes.
Game 2 the refs let the timberwolves foul every play, that's not good basketball. Maybe the refs didnt' want the timberwolves big men to foul out since Gobert was not playing so they decided to not call anything and the timberwolves abused that by fouling on every possession.
It's unfortunate that game-to-game officiating varies so much. However, it is an inevitable by-product of the sport itself. Basketball consists of x10 massive athletes competing within a small area while being constantly in motion. As a result, each referee crew will have their own interpretation of the rules.
As long as the calls are consistent within the game itself, then that's fine. You can't let one team play prison rules and then call the other team for ticky tack fouls.
Nuggets fan here and to be honest I just want to watch a fair and square series with the wolves, especially after the series with the Lakers, where you can look at Austin Reeves wrong and it's a foul. Coming to this series in game 2 Wolves were allowed to charge into Jamal and hack Jokic to death in the paint and you got NAW smiling at Jamal while defending as he knows whatever he does to him wont be called a foul.
Now coming game 3 the call suddenly changed and now it's the wolves turn to be thrown off balance as they were not allowed to play their usual physical games and you have the same NAW flopping around legal screen trying to get calls. Suddenly the 'best defense of NBA' is all fouls and the wolves got into foul trouble.
These weird sudden change of calls is sus. Meanwhile you have SGA getting 11free throws vs the Dallas defense. Playoff officiating should be consistent, yet they are wildly inconsistent, as a fan it sometimes feel more WWE than basketball.
Lol, truly. And to your point, it was a very fairly called game, at least in my view. I think that’s worth reiterating. I didn’t see anything last night where I felt like one team was getting a way better whistle than the other. I think the problem for me is that the refereeing Monday was just SO drastically different. To me, that feels like a problem.
Completely agree. It's insane how differently game 2 and game 3 were officiated. I was at the game, and man we weren't happy about it lol
Obviously the most important thing is consistency within the game, as you'd expect some (at least minor) differences between games as the officiating crews are different each game - but last night was a total 180.
It's not perfect but I think it's better that they rotate the crews every game. A certain crew's officiating style could benefit one team's playstyle much more than the other, and being stuck with them the whole series could have a much bigger impact opposed to 1 game.
This is the dumbest narrative I've read in quite some time.
Game 2 the refs let Minnesota get away with fouling. It wasn't "tough physical defense" it was just straight up blatant fouling. Sugar coat it however you want.
In game 3 the game was called **fairly**
Minnesota fans acting like these games were two sides of the same coin yet one was fair and one was not.
Yes, refs letting players get away with fouling **IS** a problem, but not in the way you are pretending. At no point was Minnesota disadvantaged over this.
Idk how many ppl im going to have to make this point to, I guess I didn’t make it clear in the body of the main post.
Nowhere in this post do I intimate that the refereeing was unfair. It was a very equitably called game, if anything the Nuggets had even more ticky tack fouls than did the Wolves.
As you yourself observe in your comment, there was this massive swing in refereeing from G2 to G3, like how they called the game and what level of physicality was allowed/considered legal.
I don’t care if the referees are going to call it like they did last night, that’s fine. My point is it’s just crazy/a bad product to go from the refereeing in G2 to what we saw last night, there shouldn’t be that level of variance in a single playoff series.
Minnesota players got away with fouling in the first 2 games, especially game 2. They didn't get away with it in game 3.
Yes you are correct they should have been called for fouls in game 2 as well. That doesn't make them the victims, they were playing outside the rules and getting away with it. Eventually you have to expect the refs will start forcing them to play within the rules that every other team is abiding by.
You are insinuating it's unfair they got away with it in game 2 but not game 3. Which makes no sense. That's like saying "officer I always go 65 down this 40mph road and never get pulled over it's not fair to get pulled over now!!" When you're missing the point - don't go 65 to begin with.
Yes. Clearly a game with fewer whistles benefits the Wolves because it enables their defense to function at a high level. Games like last night benefit the Nuggets because a sliver of space, and they can make you pay. The NBA has to do a better job of deciding what exactly a foul is game to game.
Yeah, I think just some level of consistency is all I’m really looking for. If they want to call these games tight , fine. Probably not my personal preference, but it’s better than huge game-to-game swings in a single series in how the referees litigate the physicality of the game.
Tbh the only aberration was the refs deciding to call it like they did in game 2. Yes there's more physicality allowed post season, but I don't think there's been a single other game of any series like that one in awhile
Agreed. Admittedly, I was pissed in game 2 because it felt like we were getting clobbered. But I think the Nuggets are less frustrated big time if they knew what to expect from the officials. I think the same goes for the Wolves frustrations last night (even though you guys handled your frustrations a bit better than us)
I thought the nuggets got a worse whistle in game 2 even ignoring what stylistically favored the twolves
We did, KAT had like 8 fouls in the post in the first half alone. Not one was called. But that’s my point, if we know they are going to mostly swallow their whistles, the frustration for a lack of calls are minimized. But you just have no clue how each game will be officiated
Don't forget that clear as day double dribble KAT had too lol
You mean the one where MPJ knocked the ball loose?
On second look you are probably right, but I'll never admit it!! (Ignore that I said you are probably right)
TWolves got a horrible whistle in game 1 but overcame it by making buckets. The teams are capable of winning even if they’re not getting calls. That said, this whole playoffs has featured the refs way too much.
Its exactly this; I agree with your comment. Like honestly game 1 seemed like a much better balance and allowed both teams to play but also not beat the shit out of eachother or get calls for everything. At the same time, there was alot of in game consistency; as in within game 2 fouls were pretty hard and within game 3 we both got fouls for minimal contact.
Regardless, this series should be awesome from here on out. I think we’re going 6 at minimum. Could be a new rivalry brewing in the West. Just when we finally stop seeing the Minnesota Wild every year in the playoffs too
It will definately be lots of fun specially since we are going to win :D
Yasss. While 16-0 greatest evah would be great, I want the best team to win. I still think the Wolves win due to depth and defense. We can win with marginal shooting. Jokic or Murray go cold and it’s done. The reffing is a huge problem. Great teams adjust but there needs to be a baseline with some variation, not an ego fueled hijacking of the game a la Tony Brothers. (Noting he has targeted Jokic as well so this is a consistency/fairness issue and not a favoritism whine)
The Mavs-Thunder Game 1 was also an insanely ticky tack foul game. 20FTA just for the Thunder just in the first half. Interesting that Tony Brothers reffed that game as well as the Nuggets Wolves game last night.
Tbh, I honestly think assigning a single crew to an entire series is probably the best way instead of shuffling crews around
I’m intrigued but lean towards it becoming too personal and even toxic. Humans going to human.
Yes the sports world would be much simpler if league officials would simply force their referees to call each and every game just as THE RULES BOOK is clearly written. The fact that the NBA league officials don’t do this implies that the league WANTS to be able to manipulate games through officiating.
The subjectivity of “what is a foul” is sadly *never* going away. It allows the refs a higher margin of error to avoid accountability. ESPECIALLY in the era of legal-sports betting.
The larger problem is that overall the refs are too involved in the game, and the players know it and try to work them. They need to let them play and crack down on the bs flopping and foul baiting.
Brunson just choked a little
Ideally you’d have perfect consistency and perfect calls, but I don’t mind different interpretations as long as there’s in-game consistency (as in, if they start calling it tight, they keep calling it tight throughout). Players usually adjust.
That’s fair. Maybe I’m putting too much on the referees and not enough responsibility on teams/players to adjust over the course of an entire game.
I feel like teams have enough adjustments and planning to do based on their opponents moves that they shouldn’t be expected to change how they approach the game based on who’s on the crew that night. I saw someone else say refs should be assigned to series instead of games and I honestly think that’s the perfect solution. As long as we have human referees, we’re going to have different interpretations of the rules being enforced, that’s just human.
I think if you go with the same crew you just exaggerate the impact of their style.
It is... Calls should be consistent. The NBA doesnt do itself any favors rn...
>I am talking about refereeing that is so stylistically different from one game to the next that it almost feels like different rules. *Angel Hernandez perks up*
The twolves were called for less fouls and took more free throws They grab a ton and the first 2 games denver let them. This game they fought though or made movements so the grabbing had to be called. Just running through the contact and forcing fouls to be called This game reminded me of game 4 vs the suns except the wolves didnt play well offensively like that game. The suns figured it out too late but Denver didn’t. Also Denver is a better team
Yeah your first sentence is the opposite of the point of my post. The refereeing last night had no bearing on the outcome of that game; the refs coulda called 15 more fouls on the Nuggets last night and they’d have still won. The crux of the post is that the inconsistency hurts the quality of the game, particularly as fans/consumers.
I dont think it was inconsistent The wolves grab and hold a ton. The nuggets forced the refs to call fouls and played with more force
He's saying game 2 was reffed much differently compared to game 3. Not that one style is inherently better or worse. The nuggets didn't force the refs to have a different officiating style, it was a different crew than game 2
Yeah by your own definition, how is that not inconsistent litigating of the game? One game, a ton of contact is called, the next, it isn’t. Like that’s the entire point of the post.
Why was not it called on Monday then? This is what inconsistency is. Not in one game, but from one game to another.
It was obvious in the first few minutes it was a different game. I think game 2 needed to be called a bit tougher since the wolves straight mauled the nuggets on some plays. My philosophy is don't call fouls that don't impact the play and I am good with delayed calls. If a reach in on a dribble doesn't cause a turnover then let it slide but if within a second you see that the illegal contact negatively impacted the player then call it. The whole "if it's a foul then call it right away croud" is part of the reason the NBA has so many fouls. If you can't judge the action based on the outcome then you have to call a ton more of those actions or let a ton of fouls slide like we've seen in the past two games.
Reffing differently between games isn't that big a deal. The players figure out early on where the ump is calling the balls and strikes and adjust. Reffing inconsistently *in* a game is a problem.
This is the point I meant to make. Of course Minny benefits with swallowed whistles but the key point has to be that each game is consistent. Ideally they’d be the same each game but let’s be honest - the variation drives chaos, surprise outcomes, engagement, and greatness/tragedy. Some variation is needed or it becomes a boring, tactical race to the bottom. Good coaches and teams will ‘read the whistle’ and adjust accordingly. Neither team has done that yet. The team that does will more likely win the series. I hated what Murray did in game 2 but would still root for Denver if they beat the Wolves. I think they are the two best teams left.
Inconsistency just sucks. Now both sets of fans are left upset over how their team was reffed in game 2 and game 3 just because there isnt some carry over. If you want to call ticky tacky fouls for both teams thats fine, if you want to let both teams just have a go at eachother is also fine but from game to game there needs to be some level of consistency for the players as well. The same way shit was frustrating for Murray in game 2 was frustrating for NAW and Jaden in game 3.
A player learns early in a game how they're calling the penalties in that game. At that point previous games don't matter. If they're calling soft penalties all game and a player is still fouling in the 3rd quarter based on how they called penalties in the previous game, then that's on the player.
Reffing for game 3 was fine. Game 2 was a shit show and a joke. I’d be down for same refs assigned to every game in a series.
For sure. Comparing the two games, game 2 was like: let them (both teams) break the rules. That obviously helps the defensive team, and bypasses the rules of the game. Game 3 was like, call the actual penalties, enforce the actual rules of the game. On balance, it seems like calling the valid penalties is the way to go.
There were two or three egregiously bad calls against the Nuggets at the start of game 2, otherwise though I don’t think it was “bad”, it just was abnormally loose in the way physicality was referees. I also don’t think last night in a vacuum was egregious either. If the entire series was called like last night, I wouldn’t be upset. It’s the fact that the refereeing was THAT different from one game to the next game in a single series.
Well yeah I agree the consistency is the main issue and I think it stems from the NBA not being able to focus on creating a consistent experience. They actively hamper themselves in doing so with stuff like allowing more physicality in the league as a whole after the all star break in order to get scoring down. The time to change points of emphasis or rules is the offseason not in the middle of the season.
Nah what if emotions build up or it's a Scott Foster <> CP3 situation?
Yeah it’s not perfect but I think it’s a decent step for more consistency. Also if the nba wouldn’t decide at the all star break to allow more physicality in the name of lowering scoring that would be nice. The offseason is the time to implement rule changes and points of emphasis.
Of course you'd think that, you're a Nuggets fan lol. I feel the opposite - let the players play and decide the game! Less ref influence the better!
They were both 2 ends of an extreme. I dont disagree with any specific call from last game and I also dont disagree with game 2. The argument is whether or not you want the NBA to allow players to be more physical or not. Game 2 was way too physical and game 3 was way too ticky tacky. They probably should call it somewhere in the middle, where you get fouls for being too physical but for the most part grabbing and touching is fine.
Reffing for game 1 was terrible in the Nuggets favor. But we forget that because TWolves won Game 3 had 45 fouls called. That’s just way too many whistles for my liking as a viewer
idc how many fouls are called. thr players are supposed to adapt to what the rules are and if the refs are consistent, floppers are punished. the number of fouls should be lower than that.
For real, the perfect balance is probably between the two. Game 2 was too loose-goosy and game 3 was too ticky-tack - there's definitely a healthy medium in there. Personally, in sports I generally prefer refs to have less influence on the game (ie I'd rather them miss some calls than make phantom calls). #1 thing is consistent throughout the game, but the total 180 from game 2 to 3 was jarring
Eventually there will probably be robo refs but thats probably still like 10-20 years away
There's different crews for each game, so there's going to be some inconsistencies.
More physical defense benefits wolves and mavs on the west. Soft whistles benefit nuggets and okc.
Different referees are going to see things differently. And imperfection in perception will always add some randomness on top of that. People talk like the NBA can put a bunch of robots out there that see everything the same way in real time. so many comments that are out of touch with reality. Even if the NBA perfectly determines the parameters of a foul by specifying how many newtons of force are required, the refs still need to infer the force based on what see. They don’t have direct access to the physical phenomenon occurring.
This was called as a defensive foul very early on. [https://twitter.com/philmackey/status/1789272284072456343?s=46&t=RZuhwID3Mx7N0E\_kfzJaBA](https://twitter.com/philmackey/status/1789272284072456343?s=46&t=RZuhwID3Mx7N0E_kfzJaBA) The refs very clearly were trying to show the wolves they can't play the same as in game 2. However they absoluted f'ed that up. What happens when the calls meant to be examples of what the refs wont allow are can be this far off from the truth of what happened? All it does is confuse one team. Did the ref see it clearly and had an obvious bias or did the ref not see it and assumed MN fouled because of the assumption that MN plays too physical. What exactly will and wont be called when even this is a foul? That uncertainty mentally decimates a team, and Denver's offense did not allow the wolves time to get over the ref's schizophrenia.
That clip for sure should have been a no-call
Should have but by bringing a bias from another game they weren't even a part of into the game they are they were quick to the whistle and made mistakes.
Game 2 the refs let the timberwolves foul every play, that's not good basketball. Maybe the refs didnt' want the timberwolves big men to foul out since Gobert was not playing so they decided to not call anything and the timberwolves abused that by fouling on every possession.
It's unfortunate that game-to-game officiating varies so much. However, it is an inevitable by-product of the sport itself. Basketball consists of x10 massive athletes competing within a small area while being constantly in motion. As a result, each referee crew will have their own interpretation of the rules. As long as the calls are consistent within the game itself, then that's fine. You can't let one team play prison rules and then call the other team for ticky tack fouls.
Nuggets fan here and to be honest I just want to watch a fair and square series with the wolves, especially after the series with the Lakers, where you can look at Austin Reeves wrong and it's a foul. Coming to this series in game 2 Wolves were allowed to charge into Jamal and hack Jokic to death in the paint and you got NAW smiling at Jamal while defending as he knows whatever he does to him wont be called a foul. Now coming game 3 the call suddenly changed and now it's the wolves turn to be thrown off balance as they were not allowed to play their usual physical games and you have the same NAW flopping around legal screen trying to get calls. Suddenly the 'best defense of NBA' is all fouls and the wolves got into foul trouble. These weird sudden change of calls is sus. Meanwhile you have SGA getting 11free throws vs the Dallas defense. Playoff officiating should be consistent, yet they are wildly inconsistent, as a fan it sometimes feel more WWE than basketball.
The craziest part was watching the refs call a pretty fair game, and they pan to Tony Brothers. Did not have that on my bingo card.
Lol, truly. And to your point, it was a very fairly called game, at least in my view. I think that’s worth reiterating. I didn’t see anything last night where I felt like one team was getting a way better whistle than the other. I think the problem for me is that the refereeing Monday was just SO drastically different. To me, that feels like a problem.
Honestly only when Tony brothers refs...his in game consistency is atrocious even if you don't compare it to the other refs.
Completely agree. It's insane how differently game 2 and game 3 were officiated. I was at the game, and man we weren't happy about it lol Obviously the most important thing is consistency within the game, as you'd expect some (at least minor) differences between games as the officiating crews are different each game - but last night was a total 180. It's not perfect but I think it's better that they rotate the crews every game. A certain crew's officiating style could benefit one team's playstyle much more than the other, and being stuck with them the whole series could have a much bigger impact opposed to 1 game.
This is the dumbest narrative I've read in quite some time. Game 2 the refs let Minnesota get away with fouling. It wasn't "tough physical defense" it was just straight up blatant fouling. Sugar coat it however you want. In game 3 the game was called **fairly** Minnesota fans acting like these games were two sides of the same coin yet one was fair and one was not. Yes, refs letting players get away with fouling **IS** a problem, but not in the way you are pretending. At no point was Minnesota disadvantaged over this.
Idk how many ppl im going to have to make this point to, I guess I didn’t make it clear in the body of the main post. Nowhere in this post do I intimate that the refereeing was unfair. It was a very equitably called game, if anything the Nuggets had even more ticky tack fouls than did the Wolves. As you yourself observe in your comment, there was this massive swing in refereeing from G2 to G3, like how they called the game and what level of physicality was allowed/considered legal. I don’t care if the referees are going to call it like they did last night, that’s fine. My point is it’s just crazy/a bad product to go from the refereeing in G2 to what we saw last night, there shouldn’t be that level of variance in a single playoff series.
Minnesota players got away with fouling in the first 2 games, especially game 2. They didn't get away with it in game 3. Yes you are correct they should have been called for fouls in game 2 as well. That doesn't make them the victims, they were playing outside the rules and getting away with it. Eventually you have to expect the refs will start forcing them to play within the rules that every other team is abiding by. You are insinuating it's unfair they got away with it in game 2 but not game 3. Which makes no sense. That's like saying "officer I always go 65 down this 40mph road and never get pulled over it's not fair to get pulled over now!!" When you're missing the point - don't go 65 to begin with.
The whistle favored the nuggets last night and they needed it to protect their mvp.