Written By: J. Rice
During May in San Antonio, the weather is anybody’s guess. Some years it’s in the mid 80’s and some years like last year, on the cool side, just 64 degrees. But after game two of the Western Conference Semifinals pitting the Spurs against the Thunder, the Thunder were a lot warmer than 64 degrees, particularly under the collar.
By their own admission, NBA officials admit to missing five calls in the last 13.5 seconds of that game, effectively giving the win to the Spurs. Increasingly, in our technology-filled world, we are able to view more angles, close in tighter and slow down the action frame-by-frame all, just about real-time. So we are able to actually know if a call is wrong almost immediately. Which begs the question why we don’t use this technology all of the time to make game officiating more accurate. After all, don’t the contact sensors in tennis keep the players from McEnroe like outbursts and move the game along? Why don’t we just put a 4th referee in a video booth and have him rule on any close call or one that is out of sight of the referee on court? Although it is a part of the game to argue that the referees are biased against your team or blame them for giving the game to the other team or the league to prolong series and make money for advertisers; I’m betting that accurate officiating would be embraced by the players, fans, coaches and referees and would ultimately serve to make game better.