I am going to the lakers game tonight!

Discuss anything related to Golden State Warriors basketball here

Moderators: Mr. Crackerz, JREED, Guybrush, 32


Rookie
Posts: 26
» Sun Mar 25, 2007 1:07 pm
I live in SoCal but grew up in Norcal. hehe. I will be going to the lakers game tonight and will be cheering for GSW!!! prediction: Warriors win by 1 at the buzzer by a 3 pointer from al harrington!
User avatar

All Star
Posts: 3074
» Sun Mar 25, 2007 9:16 pm
Uhhh... that would have been super weird if Harrington had hit that shot... they would have won by 1 at a buzzer three by Al...
User avatar

All Star
Posts: 1221
» Sun Mar 25, 2007 9:20 pm
wow, did you really write that before the game??

super freaky..

anyway, outrebounded 63 to 33...pathetic...
User avatar

Starting Lineup
Posts: 811
» Sun Mar 25, 2007 11:16 pm
For sure, that would have been freaky. But although the ref signaled "in time," it would have been reviewed and showed that the clock was already at 0 before Al realeased that shot.

That would have been a heartbreaker to have it overturned.

Rookie
Posts: 54
» Sun Mar 25, 2007 11:36 pm
I was at the game too (from San Jose though). This game hurts!!!!
Still bitter about it. I can't stand those Laker fans.
User avatar

All Star
Posts: 1357
» Sun Mar 25, 2007 11:42 pm
CjR wrote:For sure, that would have been freaky. But although the ref signaled "in time," it would have been reviewed and showed that the clock was already at 0 before Al realeased that shot.

That would have been a heartbreaker to have it overturned.


I think you're right. I was thinking that too.
User avatar

Franchise Player
Posts: 9163
» Mon Mar 26, 2007 12:21 am
CjR wrote:For sure, that would have been freaky. But although the ref signaled "in time," it would have been reviewed and showed that the clock was already at 0 before Al realeased that shot.

That would have been a heartbreaker to have it overturned.


If it did go in, it better have counted. The refs owe us after that game they blew back in Washington.

I mean if replay didn't clearly show that Arenas' shot was released after the buzzard and that there is a rule that you cannot get T'd up after the game is over, then those refs are a mix of Ray Charles and David Stern.
User avatar

Starting Lineup
Posts: 811
» Mon Mar 26, 2007 12:32 am
cladden wrote:
CjR wrote:For sure, that would have been freaky. But although the ref signaled "in time," it would have been reviewed and showed that the clock was already at 0 before Al realeased that shot.

That would have been a heartbreaker to have it overturned.


I think you're right. I was thinking that too.


Yeah, Al was wide open, but he doesn’t have a quick release. I was thinking Monta on that with .06 left, but he probably wasn’t open.
It was a really tough loss to take, and it shouldn’t have depended on that shot. We had momentum in 4th, but we let our guards down and they snuck past us. Fuckers.
User avatar

Starting Lineup
Posts: 865
» Mon Mar 26, 2007 12:33 am
dnguy, your prolly a psychic or something haha, so do u wanna be this boards psychic haha

Rookie
Posts: 26
» Mon Mar 26, 2007 12:39 am
back from the game! man, was i mad. the warriors had the game all the way until the end. during the game, i was cheering for gsw and someone next to me siad "SHHH" so i got mad and said "YOU SUCK" super loud when lamar odom missed a 3. haha. i thought the warriors had it when they were up by like 9 in the 4th. my prediction almost came true! hahaha
User avatar

Starting Lineup
Posts: 811
» Mon Mar 26, 2007 12:39 am
xbaywarrior wrote:
CjR wrote:For sure, that would have been freaky. But although the ref signaled "in time," it would have been reviewed and showed that the clock was already at 0 before Al realeased that shot.

That would have been a heartbreaker to have it overturned.


If it did go in, it better have counted. The refs owe us after that game they blew back in Washington.

I mean if replay didn't clearly show that Arenas' shot was released after the buzzard and that there is a rule that you cannot get T'd up after the game is over, then those refs are a mix of Ray Charles and David Stern.


I know exactly what you’re saying. But I guess Arenas' shot was different, though, because it wasn’t about the shot. The stupid ref’s argument was that there was a foul—even though he blew it after the buzzer. :roll:

I guarantee that if Al’s shot had gone in, it would have been reviewed. And on the replay, the ball was still in Al’s hand. To have it gone in and have it overturned would have sent my shoe flying at the TV and into the ref's head.
User avatar

Franchise Player
Posts: 9163
» Mon Mar 26, 2007 12:53 am
CjR wrote:
xbaywarrior wrote:
CjR wrote:For sure, that would have been freaky. But although the ref signaled "in time," it would have been reviewed and showed that the clock was already at 0 before Al realeased that shot.

That would have been a heartbreaker to have it overturned.


If it did go in, it better have counted. The refs owe us after that game they blew back in Washington.

I mean if replay didn't clearly show that Arenas' shot was released after the buzzard and that there is a rule that you cannot get T'd up after the game is over, then those refs are a mix of Ray Charles and David Stern.


I know exactly what you’re saying. But I guess Arenas' shot was different, though, because it wasn’t about the shot. The stupid ref’s argument was that there was a foul—even though he blew it after the buzzer. :roll:

I guarantee that if Al’s shot had gone in, it would have been reviewed. And on the replay, the ball was still in Al’s hand. To have it gone in and have it overturned would have sent my shoe flying at the TV and into the ref's head.


Yeah, I gotcha. And of course it'd be reviewed. There's a rule where if a shot goes in before the buzzard, it must be reviewed. But I agree, if there was 0.7 left instead 0.6 and Al made it, it would've counted. But all in all, if he did make it and it didn't count, I'd go down to La-La land and choke those refs.
User avatar

Franchise Player
Posts: 5889
» Mon Mar 26, 2007 1:08 am
Any celebrity sightings?

Is Jack Nicholson still rocking courtside seats looking like his been drinking for 72 hours straight!
User avatar

Franchise Player
Posts: 9163
» Mon Mar 26, 2007 1:14 am
pawnograffiti wrote:Any celebrity sightings?

Is Jack Nicholson still rocking courtside seats looking like his been drinking for 72 hours straight!


Yep, he's bald because of a movie he's working on. No Jessica Alba... sadly. Thought she'd be there since she's real close friends with Baron and I believe she's a Lakers fan. Maybe a Warriors... God I hope so. Nothin' better than a rockin' hot celebrity who'd I rip on any time any day and find out she's a Warriors fan!! :mrgreen:
User avatar

Moderator
Posts: 13751
» Mon Mar 26, 2007 10:38 am
Jessica Alba is a Warriors fan. Just wanted to clear that up. :thumbleft:

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests