NBA Referees Make Calls, Hilarity Ensues!

The NBA recently came out with the "NBA Video Rulebook" to help fans better understand the calls that are made by their referees. While the premise was an interesting one, after watching some examples I had to ask myself, "Is this a joke?" The only answer I have is, yes, yes it is.

So, what videos did I watch first? Clearly the technical fouls. I was interested in what was known as a "respect for the game" technical foul.

According to the video rulebook, upon being called for a foul, a player is allowed a "heat of the moment" reaction. This reaction, however, must quickly "dissolve," meaning the player cannot direct his complaint at the official and must stop his complaint more-or-less immediately.

The rulebook provides two examples of "heat of the moment" reactions that dissolve quickly and two examples of "heat of the moment" reactions that do not dissolve quickly. I looked at the ones that do not dissolve, or, ones that lead to a technical foul.

To my utter amazement, both clips show the referee making the wrong call. The first clip was a play in which Earl Watson (of the then Sonics) was being called for a loose ball foul. The referee should have made no call because the contact made by Watson was incidental, which, under NBA rules, is allowed and is not considered a foul.

Yet, the video rulebook offers this explanation as to why it was called a technical: "Here, in response to the foul call, the defensive player, No. 25 in the white uniform, continues to berate the official following his initial expression making comments and gestures in resentment to the foul call. The reaction here extends beyond an initial outburst and earns a Technical Foul."

The second technical foul situation that was used involved Baron Davis. This one is just as comical as the first.

The Web site uses the same explanation as before: "Here, in response to the foul call, the defensive player..."

Okay, fair enough, but it would have benefited the NBA to actually fix some of the errors before putting the site up. Davis was not arguing a foul call. He was arguing the fact that the official made a wrong call on a ball that went out of bounds off a Houston Rocket player.

It clearly shows the Houston defender Rafer Alston as being the last player to touch the ball. According to the rule, that means that the Golden State Warriors should have retained possession.

What's even funnier are the examples of what is referred to as an overt technical foul. Vladimir Radmanovic of the Lakers got a technical for being upset that there was no foul called while he was trying to get a rebound.

Here's the ruling deemed by the NBA on why Radmanovic was given a technical: "While players are allowed Heat of the Moment reactions to calls with which they disagree, a player is never permitted to air punch, wave off or direct any other similar gesture directly at an official. On this play, the offending player air punches directly at the official."

Shaq got a technical for the same reason after being called for a foul, and it clearly was a foul on Shaq who just pushed a New Jersey Nets player after grabbing an offensive rebound.

Kurt Thomas was given a technical for the same reason, except Thomas wasn't trying to disrespect the official. He was letting him know that the ball was slapped out of his hands by Suns player Steve Nash. This is another joke of a call.

Andres Nocioni was given a technical for throwing his mouthpiece into the scorers table after being called for a foul. Yet, the clip doesn't show anything remotely resembling a foul on Nocioni.

Here's the explanation for the technical: "While players are allowed Heat of the Moment reactions to calls with which they disagree, they must regain their composure immediately. On this play, the offending player throws his mouth piece at the scorer's table, several moments after his initial display of anger and following plenty of time to regain his composure. Had the mouth piece been thrown into the stands in a comparable manner, the player would be ejected."

And who's surprised the last clip involves Ron Artest? Not I. The reason why Artest, who was sitting on the bench at the time, was upset was that it's clear as day that as his teammate Shelden Williams was going up to grab an offensive rebound, his arm was held by LaMarcus Aldridge, but no foul was called.

Artest gets up off the bench and starts waving his towel at the official for not making a call on the play.

As you now can imagine, the NBA's statement reads, "While players are allowed Heat of the Moment reactions to calls with which they disagree, a player is never permitted to air punch, wave off or direct any other similar gesture directly at an official. On this play, the offending player, who is not even in the game and is positioned on the bench, stands up and air punches and waves his towel directly at an official."

To continue the hilarity, the NBA decided to put on "heat of the moment" reactions that do not result in a technical.

Earl Watson is the focus of yet another video. As he is trying to defend Deron Williams of the Jazz, he grabs Williams' arm. Watson reacted to the foul call, but calmed down almost immediately.

No technical is called on the play and the NBA stated this as the reason: "Players are allowed 'heat of the moment' reactions, but the reaction must immediately dissolve. On this play, the defensive player reacts briefly in response to being called for a foul, but he does not direct his reaction at the calling official, and he regains his composure immediately following his initial reaction. The 'heat of the moment' reaction here is within the guidelines and no further penalty results from the play."

His reaction, however, is almost identical to the reaction which netted him a technical foul the first time around.

The second non-call clip is hilarious! Amare Stoudemire is called for a blocking foul while trying to defend Allen Iverson. Stoudemire and Iverson are about 30 feet from the basket. Stoudemire hardly does anything worth mentioning. For a split second he waves his hand. I'm sure the NBA had better examples of behaviors after a call that would not earn a technical

In another section of the rulebook, there's a clip regarding kicking the ball into the stands. Lamar Odom was frustrated after an easy layup was made by the Houston Rockets. Instead of grabbing the ball and bringing it inbounds, Odom kicks the ball into the stands, not with any kind of force but just out of frustration.

This is the rationale from the NBA: "Players are not permitted to intentionally throw, kick or send the ball into the stands for any reason. Any violation of this rule results in a technical foul. Note also that if the ball enters the stands with force, the player would also be ejected from the game. On this play, after the basket is made, No. 7 in the blue uniform kicks the ball into the stands, but not with force, so this is a Technical Foul but not an ejection."

I hope the other sections of the video rulebook are more informative than the one on technical fouls, because the only thing that's good for is a laugh.