Cairns then daylight

Boone goes boom

Taipans have shot 6 of 9 free throws. Melbourne have 21 of 28.

WTF??

When does the away team ever shoot three times as many free throws as the home team?

Fearne's head is very shiny

Ware wasn't legall back in court

Wow...that was close.
Top win by United. I thought it was slipping away for a while but they toughed it out. Wasn't sure whether they had that in them on the road.
Casper came up huge again.

MU then daylight, MU now officially the team to beat!

YES GO CANS

oh wait looks like I'm late

I couldn't watch the game, as the nbl.tv app doesn't work on either my tablet or smart phone. It was a very uneven free throw count, and it looked like the refs brought MU back into the game in the 3rd quarter, with a lot of free throws going their way. Was it just that MU attacked the rim and drew fouls, and Cairns didn't?

Why the hell won't Fearne play Edwin in the 4th quarter???

That foul by Boone on Jawai I'd like to see not called and let Jawai score

All three of those refs should be stood down for that performance. Outrageous.

"#Refs fail.
"Ware wasn't legal back in court"
No he wasn't and that was the ball breaker ultimately for the Snakes. Lodge an appeal which will get you now where. That's how bad it is now. The Refs could have and should have reviewed it. NO wonder they are still losing control."

The only way to tell that is by slow motion replay. So you can't blame the refs for getting that wrong. Also you can't review a play like that I don't believe. You can only review it if it goes out of bounds and the ball is in dispute.

Cairns only have themselves to blame. Up 14 and someone missed a layup (I think Trice). United then hit a 3. Cairns come down have a sloppy turnover and another 3 for United. Then it was just poor composure by Cairns.

Before Ware hit basically the game winner, Trice was guarding him but then before the ball was thrown in swapped with Gliddon. Trice knew Ware would get it and instead of taking any responsibility he bailed out on them. If that was going to be the case Edwin should have been out there.

Cairns last play was rubbish also. Why not have Jawai screen on the otherside for Worthington and see if they can get a better shot or get fouled. Instead it was a low percentage play.

I don't know what planet Brunson is on but the Taipans were robbed as usual.
23 fouls to 16 a joke,Jawaii too big to flop so misses 3 fouls at least a night!
Trice breakaway Stevie Wonder noticed but not the 3 blind mice?
So because of Xmas holidays Taipans get the 3 worst refs in the league.
Oh yeah that's right...it's the NBL owners team isn't it?

to be fair Thunder, the refs have been appalling everywhere this season.... but that no call on Trice at the end when clearly both Goulding and Ware were trying to foul..... it just adds unneeded salt to a fantastic game of basketball.

And that T of Jawai in the first few minutes of the game was ridiculous. It happened about 2m from me and Jawai said 'what about the foul' and got teched. Meanwhile DD and CG act like it's a grade 4 improv class...... and nothing......

*warning this post contains tremendous amounts of salt.

Thunder Jam once the alcohol has worn off and the emotions are down go watch the replay. What I said was correct. Only slow motion replay showed that Ware was out of bounds and you can't review that play.

Regarding the Trice breakaway you can't see a foul on the replays nor was a referee in a position to see the foul. So are you expecting them to have xray vision or are you expecting them just to guess that it was a foul?

As another poster and myself said your team had the chance to win it but had poor composure and stuffed it up. They are to blame for the loss.

Can't see the foul on the replays? Both Ware and Goulding were 1) reaching in and 2) Goulding's body was illegally impeding Trice's path.

The replay shows that in normal speed and slow.

"The only way to tell that is by slow motion replay. So you can't blame the refs for getting that wrong. Also you can't review a play like that I don't believe."

You can review that play, and it was pretty obvious watching on TV in real time that he hadn't grounded his foot. That call should not have been missed.

Thankfully it didn't really have an impact as Melbourne burped it straight back. The call for Jawai's fourth foul on the other hand...

Feel sorry for all you Taipans fans, the reffing near the end of the game was typically atrocious. I'm trying hard not to single out and bag referees, its a difficult job after all, but the moment I saw Matt Townsend onscreen I didn't have much expectation for the standard of refereeing in this game. He's one of the major stinker in this year's batch of officials.

Every person in the stadium including Ware & Goulding knew it was a foul....of course they wanted him on the line and not shooting a layup !!.
The unexpected steal caught(the already exposed refs)out of position.

The constant contact on Jawai as he went to the basket was obvious and (very well)calculated by Melb...unfortunately the big fella is going to have to learn to 'yelp whilst flailing arms & legs' to get a call in the NBL.

This is the other side of the flop issue,the problem is there is no middle ground or common sense with actual contact Vs acting'....

You can review that play

"Every person in the stadium including Ware & Goulding knew it was a foul."


Could have asked me...

http://www.gordong.com/752-taipans_v_melb/index.html#img=LR-161229-am8i0969.jpg

"No you can't."

Any decision in the final two minutes of an NBL game can be reviewed at the referees' discretion. The NBL made the change last year after the Goulding-Webster debacle.

I made that point earlier in the year, regarding an offensive foul drawn by Nick Kay at the Arena and another call a week or two later, only for someone else to dig up the actual press release from the time which stated it was administrative things only and couldn't be used to overrule a decision to call, or not call, an infraction.

Which as far as I can tell changes nothing, and wouldn't have helped with the Webster-Goulding thing anyway (in which their only mistake was applying a rule that didn't exist, rather than any determination of what happened), but that's apparently what was done.

Even if it were what you thought, and what I had thought prior to seeing that release, I don't see how you can review a no-call.

I watched this on an iPad mini and could see the foul as it happened.

United now 6-2 with Casper and 9-4 with Goulding.

Kobe, the list of instances referred to in the statement was not exclusive of anything not mentioned.

The key wording in the statement was:

"Any decision in the last two minutes of a game can be referred for review by the instant replay system at the referees' discretion."

I found the initial NBL statement which is clear, had a look for any follow up with further details but can't find it.

Whichever way it is, after the Melbourne-NZ debacle you would hope they would have made it inclusive of any decision the ref feels the need to review as they promised to do.

I specifically remember wording about not being able to overrule a decision to call or not call an infraction. I don't remember enough to find it via Google, though; it was posted in a thread here only a couple of weeks ago. Unless it was OzHoops, maybe.

In the Trice fast break, I agree that there was probably a reaching foul but you guys are dead wrong on the Ware out of bounds call - the correct call was made.

There is no requirement to "ground your foot" before touching the ball. The key question is whether, at the time that Ware touched the ball, was any part of his body (usually a foot) in contact with the the floor on or beyond the end line. The answer is no. If a player is in the air when he touches the ball, he is still out of bounds if, when he took off, his foot was on or beyond the sideline or endline. This does not apply here because his front foor was clearly in bounds (touching the floor) and his back foot in the air when he touches the ball

The only time when "grounding your foot" is relevant in basketball is for the 3 seconds in the key (restricted area) rule. For an offensive player to have exited the key both feet must touch the floor outside the key - it's not enough for just one foot.

I'm a referee and referee adviser (admittedly Melbourne-based and a United fan).

It was a really good game but in all honesty I agree that the result could/should have been different if the refs had called the foul on Trice's fast break. I think a ref would be reluctant to make that call unless they actually saw a foul. None of the refs were in a good position to see one, which is not unusual on a breakaway.

Taipans made the fatal mistake of letting Casper get the ball after they had previously forced the 5 second call. They let him get it and Cam Gliddon is too slow to guard him one on one. Agent 97 was the only Taipan who could hope to stay with Casper.
The Taipans took too many poor shots down the stretch to close it out. They should have gone inside or driven to the hoop more.

I am over blaming officials, they are inconsistent all over the world, end of story, but I will say this game was another reminder of just how awesome the NBL is this season!

PS: Anyone see the Cav's v Warriors game the other day: http://ftw.usatoday.com/2016/12/richard-jefferson-dunk-taunt

Officials down right taking the fun out of that moment, no need to foul Jefferson at all for a smile and a wink at Durant, seriously overzealous officiating that no one wants to see...

thanks for the great pics Gordon!

Jawai was fouled by Boone while going to the basket, and didn't bother scoring the layup.

Under the continuation rule, would the points have counted if he'd scored? Wouldn't it have been smart to try to get the bucket and the foul shot, given how close the game was?

"Before Ware hit basically the game winner, Trice was guarding him but then before the ball was thrown in swapped with Gliddon. Trice knew Ware would get it and instead of taking any responsibility he bailed out on them."

That's a rather sweeping assumption you make about Trice and his character @Brunson. I'm pretty sure the instruction came from Fearne to swap.

Trice could not have marked him either. He was blown by twice earlier in the game. They should have used the inbound marker to deny Casper the ball and made someone else beat them. But it should not have come down to one play. Cairns had a number of opportunities to ice this but couldn't.

Twinkletoes "That's a rather sweeping assumption you make about Trice and his character @Brunson. I'm pretty sure the instruction came from Fearne to swap."

After watching the replay you are correct Fearne did make the swap. My apologies.

On the replay of the Trice fast break it looks like the referee was out of position to make the call. Others have debated the out of bounds call (interestingly enough watch Trice's leg kick Ware's). End of the day Taipans got the ball back due to the five second call so it wasn't a defining decision.

I don't like Melbourne and wanted them to lose but Cairns stuffed up the big lead.

As a Melbourne fan I don't feel great about this win.

In the dying stages Cairns did have some good opportunities to finish this with Barlow''s failure to inbound the ball. Trice's steal although we can see he was subsequently fouled down the following end. The two inbound passes to Jawai which he could have tried to shoot immediately for the foul, and the increase of the clock from 1 second up to 2 seconds.

That being said, you could argue a few poor foul calls and missed plays earlier in the game would've changed the outcome, but why isn't Trice's 5/15 shooting or Worthington's 5 turnovers, or allowing Ware and CG combine for 40pts considered part of the reason Cairns unfortunately lost and instead it's another blame the refs situation.

Podge, you always conjure excuses for Taipans ineptitude... What's a potential reason Fearne didn't get Fu on to defend Ware/Goulding on that final possession?

conjure excuses? I wear a robe but i am no wizard Mr Fiedel.

turnovers (Wortho's 5 in particular) hurt and we lost momentum at the worst moments possible. That 8 point run when Melb got back into the game came on the back of about 3 Wortho turnovers. Probably his worst game of the season, but given his shoulder injury that doesn't surprise me.

The usual sub par refereeing, especially in the clutch, just rubs salt into the wounds.. Interesting to note that after the game, when approached by the media, the refs said that the contact on the Trice breakaway should have been called.

Fu wasn't guarding Ware or Goulding because he wasn't on the court - I thought that the lineup they had with Glid at 3 and Mc at 2 had worked pretty well all game, especially when it came to containing Goulding and Ware.
I'd assume the thought behind having Gliddon switch with Trice was to put some size in front of Ware who was more than probably going to go for the mid range jumper, he wrong footed Cam, got plenty of separation and the rest is history.

I'd stick with that starting lineup too, especially with house Mc is hitting that 3 ball.

I just find it funny that the refs call games really tight; but then proceed to make a no-call on a blatant foul.

I also want to see fast break fouls changed (not necessarily solely an NBL thing; but particularly in the NBL to create a better spectacle).

The league should call intentional and cynical fouls (especially to stop fast breaks) more often and there should be harsher penalties against teams who stop the break/foul intentionally i.e. 2 shots and the ball or even a yellow card system allowing 5 on 4 (crazy idea the latter I know).

I also hate watching teams (as MU did last night) deliberately foul at the end of the game because they have fouls up their sleeve - I asked myself last night; if MU are intentionally fouling..is that not the definition of an intentional foul in which case it should be two shots and the ball. The rules AFAIK prevent intentional and deliberate fouling; but leagues seem to let it slide at the end when teams have fouls up their sleeve - why? it's still intentional.

The problem with that idea @MACDUB, holistically, is that when you start making up rules for particular circumstances you end up doing it for the wrong reasons and potentially over officiating the sport.

I agree in part with doing something to stop the blatant fast break, only when there is no player between the ball and the hoop, but your ideas may be too specific in nature.

MACDUB, Hollywood Mal remarked earlier this season that players on breakaways are getting nothing, to the extent that contact is/has been dangerous.

Risk/reward - the refs dont call things so defenders go hard, from, behind.......................

"The rules AFAIK prevent intentional and deliberate fouling; but leagues seem to let it slide at the end when teams have fouls up their sleeve - why? it's still intentional."

I've always felt this intentional fouling is a bigger problem than flopping. Personally, I find it the least attractive aspect of watching NBL and basketball more generally. Tactical fouling should be discouraged by the rules but isn't, particularly in close end games. I'm not sure if that's because of the officiating or the rules themselves.

It seems to me that a harsher penalty associated with shooting fouls would probably get rid of tactical fouling altogether, throughout the game. e.g., for shots awarded following a foul, the first foul shot is worth 2 points and the subsequent foul shots are worth one each.

Part of the problem then becomes the player with the ball drawing fouls by creating contact before shooting, as discussed in a separate thread a few weeks back. i.e., shooting player backs into the defending player, forcing him out of a legal defensive stance (vertical hands come forward and down as the defender is hit in the gut) and then the shooter goes up through the arms and is awarded a foul. Variations of this tactic are used routinely, close to the basket, and not called as an offensive foul.

If the penalty for shooting fouls was made harsher, some action would be need to discourage more shooter-initiated contact. e.g., through tighter offensive foul calling, to maintain reasonable offence-defence balance in the game. This may be a reason for FIBA not acting to address deliberate fouling in the game.

Podge, I don't think Ware was contained very well considering he had 16 points in the second half. And you should have realised by now that United never have both Ware and Goulding on fire at the same time. We did no better on the Ware/Goulding duo as any other team this season m8ey.

Manu, United have had Ware and Goulding on fire more than once. They're consistently the top 2 scorers and are the engine room for everything they do on offense. Check out their eff and usage stats.

Given the number of shots that they took and the location of those shots, i thought the D had done a pretty good job - they got kept below their PPG avg. More than a fair number of their makes were just (typically) classy shooting over the top of very good D (i can think of at least 4 examples off the top of my head).
Ware was incandescent in the last 3 minutes (I think he scored the last 8 points for United), no one could have stopped him.... except maybe the ghost of Grabu.

No way putting Fu on Ware would have gone any better, he's got quick feet but Gliddon and Trice have quicker, and Ware was burning past them.

Ware isn't blinding quick, but he's really strong and defenders have to play him tight because his J is cash. I'd say the strongest point guard (if not guard) in the league, and he used that time after time. Fu is a beast on the ball and can hold his ground unlike any other Taipans defender. I saw him defend on the ball a bit in the pre-season.

Defensive ability doesn't hinge on who has the quickest feet either, I thought that would've been pretty clear

Can you provide examples of when both Casper and Chris have been hot at the same time? Goulding was hot in the first term, then Ware took the reigns. It's been the case since he got here.

But that's not my point man, all I'm saying is that Fearne should've brought Fu -- the guy signed chiefly for his defensive ability -- on to guard either Ware or CG

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree.

Ware isn't Randall quick, but he has a lightning first step, great body control and like you said he's strong as hell - like a tiny version of Homicide with a jump shot. Lateral speed or other worldly anticipation is essential if you're guarding a guy 1 on 1 who has a quick step and great handles. Yes Fu is a great on ball defender, but I still don't think he hypothetically does any better. Gliddon made a bad read.

Only 1 guy can shoot the ball at a time, i'm talking per game. Ware and Goulding carry the team over 40 minutes.

McCarron was also +13 in 23 minutes and he was primarily guarding Goulding and Ware most of the game. If you take anyone out for Fu i probably would have taken Wortho out.

If i'm coaching, given his injuries, i probably play Fu instead of Wortho for the last 5 minutes.

But there's a reason i'm not coaching....

We got done on the boards enough as it was in that fourth qtr. Wortho's absence would've probably made it worse

yeah possibly, I guess having an injured Wortho is probably still better than most. Given the 5 turnovers he had earlier, maybe he should have just sat out to recover.

What are you thoughts on Eggs and Jawai on the court at the same time? Eggs isn't too bad on a switch and showed some solid range last night.

Yeah, Frankly I think 'Loughzy' (lousy) is a perfect nickname for Al. He has spurts, but is a bit of a liability more minutes for Egwu can't hurt.

He will take some of the defensive load off Nate too. Cam bang with a bigger body than Wortho or Lousy can, so he could save Nate from some foul trouble. Egwu is better than what he's showing and needs to be taking more shots, thus needs to be put in different situations. He's legit from 15-18 feet, so I don't see spacing as so much of a problem. Would help us on the glass too. Jawai is a great screen setter, so I can see some misdirection happening where Jawai can screen on the perimeter for a Trice or Gliddon, while Egwu ducks down low. I think they can work on both ends no doubt.

And Nnanna's right-hand jump hook is sort of money for jam, he would do well with a few back-to-basket opportunities each game

Yeah i'm on the exact same wavelength as you on this one.

I really want Al to do well, and I get bloody excited when he does - like those 2 sweet turn around baseline j's last night... but.... then.... father time is undefeated.

@Free Throws, I had the same issue. The app has been updated so try deleting and reinstall from scratch. Worked for me

Podge, it's just a shame that Loughz has another full season left on his deal. We really shouldn't have locked him in for three years...

I think it's the same size as the original but just spaced it out.
His locker room presence till has plenty of value.

I still believe in the Loughzy! :)

His best days may be long behind him but if he's on a cheap contract Loughton still has some value for one more year at least. He can still hit a few 3s and calm the young guys down.

Guys a natural with the fans too, at the Xmas party he was the only player who walked around the room with his kids in tow and made a point of speaking to everyone who came along.

Totally agree CT.

Travis trice on the other hand turned up in his college team gear and blew straight past my friend and his 3 year old kid who was trying to high-five him. Twat.

@Peter, thanks. I'll try that.

@CT, Kingpodge and Manu, I've thought all season Fearne should play Nnana and Nate together. Nnana has a reliable shot frrom the elbow, as well as his hook shot. It would also make it harder for teams to guard Nate in the post. Fearne, however, does not see Nnana as an option in offence, so it will never happen; neither will Fu guarding anyone in the final minutes or seconds of a game, because he's not allowed to play in the final quarter.