Lakers vs Warriors referee report Two misjudgments, James free throws are no problem!
The NBA referee issued a verdict about the Lakers and the Warriors, this verdict is problematic, and it is biased in favor of the Warriors, James has no problems with his three-point shot, and Big Dream does not have any violations, so it is reasonable for James to shoot a three-pointer.
Mistyped two numbers.
1.Guard your dreams, 3 seconds**.
At one minute and ten seconds into the fourth quarter, the Lakers led 115-114, Russell, with his teammates, snatched his pass from him, he was behind him, he stayed there for three seconds, and it stands to reason that he should have been given a three-second foul, but all three referees ignored it, and the game continued, Russell passed, James failed to make a layup, and the Warriors got a vital attack.
2. Chase protected Vanderbilt and pushed him down, so he should blow the whistle for the unfulfilled protection.
When the game went to the third overtime, there were 7 hours left before the end of the gameAt the 3-point mark, the Lakers led the Warriors by two points with a score of 147-141, and the Warriors players protected Curry outside the three-point line, and when they tried to block Vanderbilt with their bodies, Vanderbilt knocked him directly to the ground, and at this time, the referee had closed his eyes and felt that it was a "fantastic" game, and Curry missed a three-point shot. No, in the end, when the referee ruled that Curry threw a three-pointer, the Warriors ended with 4A 7-second advantage gained 2 points.
The referee's report also illustrates two issues that have caused controversy.
First of all, the game went to the fourth quarter, and there were 222.3 seconds, Russell defended Clay, and was finally judged to be a foul, Russell blocked Guecre's three points, Russell blocked Guecre's three points, but because of the whistle, neither side got the ball, and it was only used in the middle of the penalty area, and then, Clay shot outside the three-point line, Kuminga didn't have any problems with the defense and the bottom corner, so the ball was not out of bounds. Therefore, this time the disputed judgment is correct and there is no dispute.