Ex-NBA ref Steve Javie: Dion Waiters play something 'I've never seen'
Steve Javie spent 25 seasons working as an NBA referee. He officiated more than 1,000 games, including 230 playoff games and more than a dozen NBA Finals.
With a resume like that, you’d think he’s seen it all.
But late Monday night, Javie witnessed a sequenced he’d never seen before.
And it left him pondering the same question NBA fans all over the country were asking: Did Dion Waiters really commit an offensive foul on an inbounds play?
The NBA has already weighed in: Yes, Waiters did commit a foul.
ICYMI: The controversial final 13 seconds of last night’s San Antonio game everyone is talking about. WATCH: https://t.co/8mj5vGYlCP
— NBA on ESPN (@ESPNNBA) May 3, 2016
The play in question occurred with 13.5 seconds remaining in Game 2 of the San Antonio Spurs–Oklahoma City Thunder series. Waiters was inbounding the ball from the sideline with the Thunder up by one point. Replays showed Waiters made contact with Manu Ginobili in an apparent attempt to clear space before inbounding the ball.
The refs did not whistle Waiters for an offensive foul. Had they, the Spurs would have gained possession.
Waiters inbounded to Kevin Durant, who eventually had the ball stripped away by Danny Green. The Spurs, however, were unable to score on that final possession. The Thunder walked off the court with a 98-97 win.
In the aftermath, many wondered if the refs missed a call on Waiters or Ginobili (who appeared to possibly step out of bounds in an attempt to guard Waiters.) After the game, referees admitted they should have whistled Waiters for an offensive foul.
For further clarification, we turned to Javie, an employee of ESPN, for his take on the situation.
Below is an edited Q&A with Javie:
What did you make of the sequence?
Steve Javie: First of all, it’s something in all my years of basketball, I’ve never seen. I’ve never seen a person inbounding the ball commit contact with a person on the floor. When I first saw it I thought, ‘Oh my gosh’ like (everybody) else did.
My first reaction was, ‘Can we call an offensive foul on that guy or is it just a violation because the person who is inbounding the ball touches somebody on the court … prior to releasing it?’ That would be a violation. But in talking and thinking about it, you can call an offensive foul.
So either way, if you called an offensive foul or you called a violation, the ball would be awarded to San Antonio. Now in this situation, even though they missed the call, San Antonio got the ball. So that was good, but that doesn’t mean something shouldn’t have been called.
With officiating, it is recall. We use technology in officiating to look at different training plays (in referee training sessions). Plays that maybe you personally have never encountered in your games, you can encounter in your mind through these video replays that go with the rules.
Well, something like this has never happened and, of course, I (was) just imagining it happening to me and going, ‘What was that? What can I do?’ And by the time you ask those questions, since there’s no video recall (and) you’ve never seen this play, you really don’t react (quickly enough).
So I am sure this will be in the new video case book. Everyone will see it and never forget it again. When something happens for the first time, you sit there and go, ‘Holy moly.’
Did Ginobili commit a violation on the inbounds play?
SJ: Wow, I know what you’re talking about. If we get into that and he just steps on the line, I know the rule is breaking the plane, preventing the person from throwing the ball inbounds or hindering the person from throwing the ball inbounds. I would say no in that situation.
Last night at 1 in the morning I didn’t get the replay that will probably blow it up and (show exactly where Ginobili’s foot lands). I saw (Ginobili’s foot) touching the line. Is it over the line? Is it not? To me, it wasn’t the obvious play itself. We talk about this sometimes: There are elephants and there are ants. That’s like the ant in the room. The elephant is kind of the contact (made by Waiters).”
Re: Waiters: Ginobili stepped over the line, which is a technical foul. That started the domino effect of crazy: pic.twitter.com/j2Jjlljc6f
— Royce Young (@royceyoung) May 3, 2016
So, the proper call was to award San Antonio the ball based on the contact Waiters made with Ginobili?
SJ: That’s correct.
Is there anything else you’d like to add?
SJ: It’s one that’s never been seen before. It’s one that should have been an offensive foul. Going forward, if it’s a play that ever happens again in our lifetime, I’m hoping that they’ll recall it correctly the next time.
