Timekeeping on Roy's Rainbow
by jeepurs on Nov 8, 2008 2:54 AM PST
Email
PrintI've heard from several sources now that Brandon Roy took too much time to get his shot off. One even said that with the help of replay, they had determined that it took Roy 1.6 seconds to get his shot off.
Well, I have to call BS on that. I've watched the replay on DVR, and done a frame-count comparison. According to my DVR, from the time Roy first touched the ball until it left his hands was 24 frames. It also took exactly 24 frames for the .8 seconds to tick off. So apparently Roy took nearly exactly .8 seconds to catch and shoot.
So, if anyone tries to say we were the beneficiary of some sluggish timekeeping, they're reaching. Yes, the timekeeper was about .4 seconds slow in starting the clock. But, a small lapse is to be expected, and even had the timekeeper been perfect, Roy's shot would have been in time, just barely.
Anyway, probably a waste of time on my part, but I just can't stand having people implying, "you didn't really deserve the win," especially if their case is weak.
27 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
As an objective observer, I'm going to chalk it up as homecourt advantage.
In the end, ultimately, it shouldn’t make any difference come one way or another.
The league actually reviewed it
and said it took exactly .734 seconds from the moment Roy got it to the moment it left his hand.
23 frames on a 30 fps recording.
I'm not doubting that it was technically a good shot, ...
but whoever runs the shot clock in Portland was late to start it.
late to start the clock?
by how many tenths of a second? Gimme a break. If the league actually reviewed it doesnt it seem they would take it into consideration, it being the timeclocker needed someone to jab him in the ribs and say “Dude the games on, start the clock!”
Not a Portland scorekeeper.
Also, I’m fairly certain that the NBA provides a non-affiliated person to do the timekeeping. Although that may be only for playoff games. I don’t remember for sure.
You actually counted the frames?
Rec for extreme nerdiness. I salute you.
The most amazing thing about my amazing ego is I have amazingly little about which to be egotistical.
The pick and roll this year will emphasize "roll" followed by "dunk", followed by the wailings and lamentations of your women.
I'll admit I watched it like 14x over trying to see if it was a fair timekeeping job
I thought it was. It switches to .7 relatively quickly once he catches it
Marc Gasol´s formula.
Asked about his way to succeed, Marc Gasol said: "If the coach asks me for banging my own head 200 times, I do it. Even more, I do it 500 times."
--translated by Amlmart
The NBA league office also checked the tape.
They said it was 23 frames, i.e. 0.767 seconds. http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?page=dime-081107
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Nov 8, 2008 3:08 AM PST reply actions
Nope
They would have either A) not admitted that they had checked it or B) apologized to the Rockets and said, “Unfortunately, we can’t change after the fact, etc”.
The most amazing thing about my amazing ego is I have amazingly little about which to be egotistical.
The pick and roll this year will emphasize "roll" followed by "dunk", followed by the wailings and lamentations of your women.
Which is how is should be.
See, what I fear with replay, review, rehash etc. creeping it’s way into the game is that Portland would have their MOMENT…like Roy’s shot. You go to bed on cloud 9, Blazers are awesome….then you wake up and the boxscore in the paper says the other guy won and there’s and asterisk by the score with the notation “based on post game league review”. Now that would suck.
If they want to review it to help themselves get better, fine. But I don’t want to know about it unless it was so blatant that every fan in the arena and every game highlight after the fact says the opposite. Then you’ve got egg on your face to the point where you have to say, “Sorry, we messed up. We can’t go back and change the score but we’ll try to do better next time.”
I don’t want to see the wizard behind the curtain. This is sports. This is entertainment. There’s already enough reality in life. Give me my oasis of ignorance.
superfluous
It was kind of a rhetorical question.
Your answer is exactly the reason that I asked that in the first place.
I imagine they would not only have to review
that possession, but all preceding possessions as well to know how much time really should have been left. If they really want to be accurate they will have to build a sensor into the ball so that the clock does not start running until it is activated and not when a timer perceives the ball to have been touched. Until they do this the discrepancies will just have to be lived with.
Life is exhausting when you are this stupid.
Good point
I remember Marv or Mike say “the clock did not start” when a Blazer dribbled the ball down the court late in the game.
I've been countering this same arguement with...
yao wasn’t foul’d. and shouldn’t have gotten his free throw anyway.
tie’in the game,…and we’d have torched em in another over time.
but!!! now I have more ammo for the arguement as I’ll referance you as a “professinal” time ticker checker guy!!
The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out burns out farms and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.
lol..oh yeah!
THANKS DUCK!!!!
devine intervention is cool!
The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out burns out farms and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.
is that how the nets beat detroit last night?
Devine intervention?
Marc Gasol´s formula.
Asked about his way to succeed, Marc Gasol said: "If the coach asks me for banging my own head 200 times, I do it. Even more, I do it 500 times."
--translated by Amlmart
Well...
Yes there is a human element in timekeeping. If we are at home I fully expect any mistakes to be made in our favor. If we are the road? It’s probably going to be the opposite. I haven’t done a DVR frame by frame analysis, there didn’t really appear to be a good angle inwhich to view the start of the clock in relationship to Brandons first touching the ball. It doesn’t really matter to me. It instinctively seems like Brandon got an extra beat to get that shot off, but I could be wrong, the high arcing manner of the shot made it seem like a slow motion eternity before it almost perfectly fell through the net. In anycase the call stands, we won and yes anyone questioning it should realize that timekeeping is done by humans so when you start dealing with tenths of seconds and elements and fractions of time no human should possibly be able to be perfect about, then you get what you get.
It’s not a perfect science. Has anyone gone back and looked at exactly how much time was left on the clock when Yao was fouled? It may of been we deserved more time or less time…that isn’t an exact science either. Anyone griping about Brandon getting extra time…Houston blew it by allowing Brandon to catch the ball so open. It was an amazing shot but Houston blew the .8 second defense. Final frame by frame analysis….Beautiful! We win! Yahoo!
"Mother Nature started this fight, I think it's about time we ended it!"
Watching in slow mo
I thought the time keeper did a damn fine job of starting the clock correctly.
With .8 on the clock and that there is likely a split-second lag between the time keeper pushing the START button and the time starting, and the fact that we are discussing split-second lengths of time, and that from my replay I see time start (or, can tell the button was pressed) as soon as the ball hits Roy’s hands, it tells me it was a non-story.
You CAN do a lot in less than a second in basketball.
Starting the clock so accurately is tough as hell, and it would be extremely easy to jump the gun and start early— but since this is YOUR team you would guard yourself from doing that, but the other extreme of starting a moment too late isn’t good ultimately either. So, you just do your best to hit the button and start time as soon as it touches a player… which by my replay, they did.
That momentary lag between button-pushing and clock-starting might give Roy an extra .3 (which could be all he needed), but like the link says the NBA determined he got it off in .7 sumthin’.
Lot can happen in a split second.
Mortimer
Not to mention
the refs took a considerable amount of time to review the shot after the game and I for one, waited nervously wondering if the shot was made in time. When the refs gave the all clear sign and allowed our celebration to continue, I felt confident in the call.
Lets look at who in the ESPN article suggested the timekeeper was a slackard— Dwight Jaynes. This is how Dwight Jaynes makes a living- making statements for the sole purpose of aggravating Trail Blazer fans. Let me return the favor. The only reason Dwight Jaynes wishes the timekeeper to time the rest of his life is because he deludes himself into wondering if time were slowed down maybe he wouldnt have had to kill and skin a squirrell to glue on top of his head to cover his male pattern baldness.
I like Dwight
But some of those old reporters have their stand by response always set to “GROUCHY BEEN THERE DONE THAT” and don’t always adjust for the situation.
WHY I TELL YA WITH THESE KIDS TODAY AND THEIR STARTING CLOCKS .1 TOO LATE.
I mean, it’s a nice line, the “I want that guy timing me for the rest of my life”, even though it doesn’t really stand up to what really happened. Sounds nice and cynical like an old beaten down reporter is ’sposed to sound like though!
I do like Jaynes though, honestly. He’s good at that.
Mortimer
insane these cats are. (dream shakes clock managment vent) but I guess we/ya’ll do get kinda ….panic-y.
The Faith don't panic, the faith freaks out burns out farms and torchs small villages in the name of The Faith.
The clock started a little late, but Brandon got the shot off with 0.4 on the clock so there still would have been time
It’s not like they are the Atlanta Hawks staff or something, who are notorious for making errors in counting time, fouls, etc. :)
It was obvious
the shot was in the air when the backboard lights came on, but the refs kept looking at the replays to see when the clock started. That was what made me nervous at the end of the game. But the league office had the advantage of actually counting the video frames from the time Roy touched the ball until he let it go, so they didn’t rely at all on the game clock or what the timekeeper did. It was 23 frames.
23 frames / 29.97 frames/sec = 0.767 seconds
by BlazerFanSince1970 on Nov 8, 2008 1:35 PM PST reply actions
I looked at my replay on DVR
and at 0.4 is when the ball is out of Roys hands. To me it seems that they started the clock a little late, and the relese time should of been somewhere in the 0.2
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- David Stern changed the competition committee to push new rules, report says
- Nazr Mohammed films Oklahoma City Thunder fans welcoming the team back at 5:30 in the morning (VIDEO)
- The Orlando Magic finally part ways with both Stan Van Gundy and GM Otis Smith
- Mike D’Antoni breaks silence on New York Knicks exit: ‘An obstacle had to be removed’
- Adam Morrison looks great, everyone
