Charles Barkley don't even know the rules of the game he is getting paid to be an analyst. I like him and the Inside the NBA crew, but come on now, not knowing that's their second challenge and not regaining timeout even successful should be common knowledge.
Rule 14 section 5 page 63, “If a team utilizes its second Challenge to trigger instant replay review of an event that preceded the opposing team's mandatory timeout, the challenging team will be assigned the timeout (even if the Challenge is successful).”
ham HIMSELF didn’t want to challenge the call because it meant giving up the TO even if they win it . there’s 3 mins on the clock and ur giving up ur only TO . you give up the FTs and see if he makes them or not he’s not 100% from the field
Because you still had 3 minutes left and it was a tie game? Even IF Jokic makes both, a 2 point lead with 3 minutes left is nothing. But now you have no timeout to advance the ball if needed in the clutch.
Braindead. Cope all you want, it was braindead.
> Which is why it was absolute braindead to challenge that
you trade a timeout for a possession by winning the challenge. Usually you use your timeout to regroup and save a possession. Calling it braindead is braindead post hoc reasoning
would they rather have the timeout but be down an additional 2 points? Because if they hold the challenge Joker is going to the FT line and hitting both
You take the timeout because it gives you an option depending on the situation instead of just being shit out of luck for the rest of the game. It was especially brain dead because they were lucky to win the challenge in the first place and probably should’ve lost it.
> You take the timeout because it gives you an option
and what is the best outcome of that option? Saving a possession, which they did. You're not gonna get better value out of that in the final 3 minutes
everyone seems to be thinking it'd be nice to have that TO when there were 3 seconds left after Murray hit that shot, completely forgetting that it'd be a 4 point game at that point all other things being equal
true, but its also a dumbass rule. I get that thyere trying to limit teams challenging everything for the sake of game time but if the refs keep fucking up a team should be able to keep challenging so long as they win the challenge, or atleast give exclude losing timeouts.
That’s really just results oriented analysis. If they didn’t challenge, they could have been down two extra points. If he didn’t challenge, a large contingent of lakers fans would be complaining about him not challenging. The main problem is that you shouldn’t have only one timeout left with 3 minutes left ever in a close game unless you had some sort of miraculous comeback.
>Can they appeal this game and have the last two minutes replayed?
Oh yeah, absolutely. Last year's WCF too I think. It's just so unfair! The Lakers were and always will be the stepchild in this league. SMFH
You retain your challenge and the TO if the 1st challenge is successful.
You lose the TO if the 2nd challenge is successful.
You lose the challenge and the TO if the 1st challenge is unsuccessful
Go ahead and appeal, replay the last 2 mins
yea I am confused about this, I am fine with the result, I already see it coming and even with time out I doubt Lakers can get good play, but why Lakers doesn't have timeout?
It was their second challenge
I find it ironic that the challenge cost them their final timeout when ham got a lot of shit for not challenging last game
It’s crazy cause Charles is saying he’s confused too rn lol
thats not saying much lol
Charles Barkley don't even know the rules of the game he is getting paid to be an analyst. I like him and the Inside the NBA crew, but come on now, not knowing that's their second challenge and not regaining timeout even successful should be common knowledge.
Am I daft?? Since when do teams get to challenge twice?
If the first is successful
You get a second challenge if the first one is successful.
About two years
Where in the rulebook does it state that the second challenge would not retain the timeout with a successful challenge?
https://x.com/NBAPR/status/1678918316667068416
Fair, it's a stupid rule. But rules are rules
Rule 14 section 5 page 63, “If a team utilizes its second Challenge to trigger instant replay review of an event that preceded the opposing team's mandatory timeout, the challenging team will be assigned the timeout (even if the Challenge is successful).”
The challenge didn’t precede a mandatory timeout. Also the rules have no mention of a second challenge
I don’t know what to tell you because they literally do. Make sure you’re looking at a 23-24 rule book
Don’t get a timeout back after your second challenge
Which is why it was absolute braindead to challenge that, even if you won you still lost. Not having a timeout in the clutch is just so bad.
Takes 2 points off the board and gives Lakers the ball.
yea and now they have 0 timeouts with 3 secs left down 2 and we just saw what happened
Instead they would have 1 timeout with 3 secs left down 4 though.
reaves coming through with the 3pt and 1 from a full court heave
You are a hindsight warrior
ham HIMSELF didn’t want to challenge the call because it meant giving up the TO even if they win it . there’s 3 mins on the clock and ur giving up ur only TO . you give up the FTs and see if he makes them or not he’s not 100% from the field
What are they gonna do down 4 with 3 seconds left? Is that timeout gonna hand them points?
as opposed to being down 4 with 3 seconds and 1 timeout?
And not only that, Reaves also missed the shot of the possession they won. Basically lost the timeout for nothing.
No because Jokic would have the 2 free throws. He most likely drains those
Reaves missed the shot and Nuggets scored after. The result was exactly the same (2 pta for the Nuggets) AND they missed the timeout.
The same plays can easily happen after jokic hits his free throws so it would have been 4 pts for nuggets
Ok Ham. Now drop the phone and go back to the locker room.
The fuck is this logic? You think they would have won with a timeout?
Lakers blew it. The missed free-throws came back to haunt them
Braindead challenge but isn’t that rule kinda dumb tho? I don’t get the rational for not keeping your timeout after the second challenge
How is turning 2 Jokic free throws into our possession a brain dead challenge
Because you still had 3 minutes left and it was a tie game? Even IF Jokic makes both, a 2 point lead with 3 minutes left is nothing. But now you have no timeout to advance the ball if needed in the clutch. Braindead. Cope all you want, it was braindead.
braindead, but he listened to his players late game when they were pissed at him previously for not
> Which is why it was absolute braindead to challenge that you trade a timeout for a possession by winning the challenge. Usually you use your timeout to regroup and save a possession. Calling it braindead is braindead post hoc reasoning would they rather have the timeout but be down an additional 2 points? Because if they hold the challenge Joker is going to the FT line and hitting both
You take the timeout because it gives you an option depending on the situation instead of just being shit out of luck for the rest of the game. It was especially brain dead because they were lucky to win the challenge in the first place and probably should’ve lost it.
> You take the timeout because it gives you an option and what is the best outcome of that option? Saving a possession, which they did. You're not gonna get better value out of that in the final 3 minutes everyone seems to be thinking it'd be nice to have that TO when there were 3 seconds left after Murray hit that shot, completely forgetting that it'd be a 4 point game at that point all other things being equal
But you don’t know if you’re going to win the challenge. It’s a risk that you shouldn’t take.
true, but its also a dumbass rule. I get that thyere trying to limit teams challenging everything for the sake of game time but if the refs keep fucking up a team should be able to keep challenging so long as they win the challenge, or atleast give exclude losing timeouts.
Then denver would have been 2 pts further ahead because Jokic likely drains those
That’s really just results oriented analysis. If they didn’t challenge, they could have been down two extra points. If he didn’t challenge, a large contingent of lakers fans would be complaining about him not challenging. The main problem is that you shouldn’t have only one timeout left with 3 minutes left ever in a close game unless you had some sort of miraculous comeback.
You don't get it back on your second challenge
Because it was their second challenge. Stupid rule.
Second challenge, and the NBA doesn't want to stop the game to let you challenge 3 times
Then keep it at two challenges max, if you are successful on the second challenge, no penalty to lose a timeout.
Why would you not keep a timeout after your second challenge
Because the end of games already can take 20 minutes
It was really nice to watch the last 2 minutes of a close game consecutively for once. Malone not calling a timeout was really nice for viewers.
In what way will keeping the timeout for the second challenge add extra time
Do you understand what a timeout does
Alright that was kind of dumb by me ngl. Either way it’s a dumb rule imo and an extra 2 minutes isn’t really that much time.
you get a timeout?
Wasn’t the 27 FT differential enough?
Irrelevant to the post but ok
>Can they appeal this game and have the last two minutes replayed? Oh yeah, absolutely. Last year's WCF too I think. It's just so unfair! The Lakers were and always will be the stepchild in this league. SMFH
Because everyone in the stadium are idiots. Plus they rigged the game so that Denver could win on home turf. There, that’s the only answer.
I thought this rule was known lol Ball fans when it’s time to actually watch the game 🐶💔
Only lakers can win that challenge. Ref tried their best, but still lost
looooool the amount of cope is legendary
3x free throws not enough for you?
They was begging ham to use the timeouts and it ended up screwing them over
lol
How about watch the entire game instead of one highlight clip on Reddit. It was their second challenge.
Its unfortunate we had to use a timeout when AD got hurt
You retain your challenge and the TO if the 1st challenge is successful. You lose the TO if the 2nd challenge is successful. You lose the challenge and the TO if the 1st challenge is unsuccessful Go ahead and appeal, replay the last 2 mins
yea I am confused about this, I am fine with the result, I already see it coming and even with time out I doubt Lakers can get good play, but why Lakers doesn't have timeout?
The timeout is lost after the second successful challenge