During the meeting in New York against the Knicks, David Adelman drew very, very quickly to take on his “challenge”. We are then only in the fourth minute of the match. The Nuggets coach wins it and thus obtains a second and final “challenge”.
We will have to wait for extra time, since the evening will be extended with a 58-minute match, for him to use his second “challenge”. After a rebound from Christian Braun, OG Anunoby gets his foot caught in that of the Denver back. The referees whistle an offensive foul. David Adelman can’t believe it and then asks for a video verification. There are 90 seconds left in overtime.
The men in gray review the images and change their minds, believing that Christian Braun did not intentionally make a mistake. No whistle therefore, but a consequence: the Nuggets coach no longer has a “challenge”… but also does not keep the time-out that goes with it. We only keep it on the first use, if it is won.
“We have to change the rule”, Estimate David Adelman faced with this observation. “I’m not saying it’s the referees’ fault, nor that of the coaches. If I take a challenge and win it in overtime, then I lose it, but I also lose my last timeout, therefore control of the game. We need to look into this. If I win the challenge, with one minute to go, I should be rewarded in some way. I should keep a challenge and/or a time-out. Losing both when you’re right is really frustrating. And that doesn’t allow me to control the match because I no longer have the means to stop the game.”
“It would be nice if I could take a time out after being right”
The request is clear: we must not limit the conservation of time-out to the sole use (and success) of the first “challenge”. “I know it’s a problem for coaches. I make a million mistakes, the referees make mistakes. But we can correct that. It would be nice if I could take a time out after being right”insists the technician.
From then on, did he hesitate to take this “challenge” into overtime, knowing that he was going to lose a timeout no matter what, 90 seconds from the end of overtime? Did he weigh the pros and cons? Because it’s not nothing to let go of your last weapon with so much time left…
“It’s such an important move because it gives possession back to the Knicks.”he describes. “If you do the math, then there are three 24-second possessions left and they would have two. This is not possible. We must try to control the clock as much as possible in these situations and against a team that has Jalen Brunson. I don’t want to give them multiple opportunities. » And David Adelman concludes that he thinks “that the league will probably come back to this during the summer”.
Keep reading
