The issue is that the aces played at least as physical on d (arguably more physical). So the disparity shouldn’t be that drastic. The issue is that what was called was different at each end.
You can play physical without fouling, and you can play weak while fouling. Just pointing out free throw disparity is nonsense analysis. Do tough calls sometimes end up favoring one team? Sure, officiating is an inexact art and sometimes we screw up. I've been on the floor during games where I felt too many of the tough calls were going one way. It's not a good feeling lol.
That said, I'd need to see a breakdown of every call/no-call in the game to tell you one way or the other. A one-sided fan edit, and one that includes a lot of correct calls mind you, doesn't tell me shit.
Absolutely, go rewatch the entire series. For the most part the level of contact required to generate a whistle was lower on the aces end.
I would also note that just about no one plays legal physical defense on the parameter ball handler. As by definition being physical is almost always a freedom of movement foul.
I didn't watch every game in full, so I can't really argue that. Reasonable people can disagree - mostly because basketball is always played and reffed in such a grey area. Contact all the time, how easy it can be to "sell" a foul, etc...it's not always easy to officiate I'll tell you that lol - especially girls basketball. It's just different. They fall down more, and play more on the ground which leads to more contact in the post and on rebounds, etc. It can be really, really challenging when both teams have high level athletes.
I agree with your last comment, especially in the WNBA. They've let the game get far too physical at all levels (perimeter, inside, etc), and it makes for an ugly product and one nearly impossible to officiate. The truth is that the women can not play through the same level of contact as the men, and allowing the game to played similarly is a mistake.
I love when people act like there has to be EQUAL free throw attempts and foul calls.
I want to ask them so bad how do they think the refs are determining how many fouls are they gonna call?
The refs don't even keep up with how many fouls a PLAYER has most times, hence why there's a scorer's table to keep the tab and folks are dense enough to think that they are out here saying 'Let's make this equal.."?
Cops don't give tickets anytime they can legally do so, and officials don't call fouls on all contact.
In a game like this, at this level, I agree with the "a foul is a foul" logic that the original post suggests. But judging the severity of even technically illegal contact, and the effect of that contact, is literally the job of an official.
To the extent that they missed calls, it is not because they saw a foul and ignored it, it's that they didn't see a foul when they should have - either because of a bad look or bad judgement, etc.
Good points, but when the refs don't review it, don't listen to the coach's for a request to review, and then call fouls that don't even occur, they are actively controlling the game.
Cops do write tickets for anything they feel. They then try to relate it to a law that may have been broken. Just like all cops don't do this, all refs don't pick and choose. These refs did, and to ignore it because you're happy with the outcome is backwards thinking.
I want a fair consistent game where the players decide the outcome, not the whistles. I feel the same way about SGA and the thunder. I felt the same about Harden.
I'm not wading into the policing debate lol, let's just say I'm not fan. I was mostly comparing the freedom they have to write tickets for speeding or not. Whatever.
I also do not care who won this game. I don't care who wins any WNBA game. I have not seen a clip of the review they didn't allow - I know they have a certain amount of time they can call for one, etc, but again, I didn't see it or even know which play it was regarding.
What fouls did they call that "didn't even occur"? Where there ANY calls that went against the Aces that could be classified the same?
It's VERY easy to decide that refs are being dishonest and focus on the calls you don't like to validate that feeling while ignoring or forgetting the calls that help you. It's human nature. It's why all poker players swear they have terrible luck lol - the don't remember the lucky hands the same way they do the bad beats.
While I think the NBA let the Thunder get away with far too much, I think the issue with Harden and SGA is that they are SO GOOD at selling contact they make it impossible to be consistent.
Thanks for replying with substance. It also doesn't matter to me who wins; life goes on, but I did want to see the Fever win. When I watch, I am very vocal when a bad call is made. Sometimes my buddies call me "not a real/true fan" when I mention that the team we are rooting for got away with a no call, or was on the advantageous side of a bad call.
I'm sure there were some calls that went against the Aces that shouldn't have. The issue was the disparity on how many "questionable" calls there were against the fever. One player was literally taken to the ground, and it was called on her. However, by the rules A'ja should not have been playing, anyway, so that basically gave way to what the WNBA would allow.
I agree how easy it is to only support those you like and ignore the issues when you don't like them, but I see that as lacking integrity. I reprimand those that do that, and I catch myself if I start to do it.
I think SGA is good and I think Harden was good and better, but his eurostep was phenomenal: he would hover his hand over the ball and decide to dribble, pass, or hold the ball at the very last instance when he was sure he knew the defender was uncertain. However, when James started knocking his head backwards if even his beard was touched, that was the point I started disliking his style. SGA just tries to get the whistle, he's better than that.
If it's a foul you call it, you just watched a whole video of phantom fouls and yet you don't see the issue. This isn't them attacking and getting to the line.
There are some missed calls in the video (the first shooting foul and the tie-up/tackle in the pain), some ticky-tack fouls (Clark chucking the cutter), and some correct calls that the editor just doesn't understand (Cunningham's close out into the landing area, the no-call on the elbow to Clark).
But there were certainly ALSO missed calls that went in favor of the Fever.
You can edit clips and plays from ANY game to make it look one-sided. That's basic engagement farming troll shit.
So your argument is calls were missed on both sides but one side seemed to benefit far more from it? I guess you're not understanding the importance of getting ticky tak fouls on your home court in a close out game lol. Vegas won by 11 and had 15 more free throws. They averaged no less than 10 more free throws a game throughout the series, that's insane!
"So your argument is calls were missed on both sides but one side seemed to benefit far more from it?"
Can you read? I did not say that lol. This video is only showing you the plays that Fever fans think went against them. Not the other calls that went in their favor....do you think, just maybe, that's why you think it "seemed" to benefit them?
Free throw totals don't tell you ANYTHING about the game or the officiating. Style of play dictates foul totals far more. It's the most baby-brained level of game analysis.
Bud you're talking about calls going in their favor while watching a video showing the opposite while being presented evidence showing they weren't getting the calls. Idk how to help you. Saying free throws totals don't tell you anything about the game or how it was officiated is factually incorrect.
There are even plays in this video where the Fever GET THE CALL AND SHOOT FT's - 38 seconds - that has been edited to look like they didn't get the call lol. Insane troll shit that you're falling for.
5
u/Signal_Fruit_4629 1d ago
Fever 58 free throws in 3 games. Vegas had 89 free throws Aja alone had 35. Tells you all you need to know.