Sixers Fall in Controversial Finish vs. Hawks, NBA Referees Stir Debate with Postgame Response
The Philadelphia 76ers have found themselves in the middle of another late-game controversy - and this time, it’s not just the call on the court that’s under the microscope, but the league’s response afterward.
With just 2.5 seconds remaining in Sunday’s 120-117 loss to the Atlanta Hawks, the Sixers were down by one and scrambling for any chance to flip the script. Atlanta had possession, trying to run out the clock, and inbounded the ball to Nickeil Alexander-Walker. That’s when things got messy.
VJ Edgecombe applied tight pressure, and Alexander-Walker took the ball into the backcourt. Immediately, the Sixers bench erupted.
Head coach Nick Nurse and several players were visibly livid, pleading for a backcourt violation. On the broadcast, play-by-play announcer Kate Scott and analyst Alaa Abdelnaby echoed the frustration, questioning how the officials let the play go without a whistle.
No explanation came in real time. Alexander-Walker calmly knocked down two free throws, and Quentin Grimes’ last-second three-point attempt to tie the game missed its mark.
The League’s Explanation
The next day, the NBA released its Last Two Minute Report - the league’s mechanism for reviewing critical late-game calls - and it ruled that the non-call was correct. According to the report, Alexander-Walker’s “momentum” carried him into the backcourt, which is legal under the NBA’s late-game rules.
Here’s the key part: in the final two minutes of the fourth quarter and in overtime, players are allowed to move into the backcourt after receiving an inbounds pass, provided certain conditions are met. The league said Alexander-Walker’s movement fit within those parameters.
But the controversy didn’t end there.
Referees Fire Back - At the Broadcaster
The NBA Referees official X (formerly Twitter) account - which represents the referees’ union - took things a step further. In a direct response to Abdelnaby, they posted:
“This was not a backcourt violation and has never been a backcourt violation. For those calling the game, there is a responsibility to know the NBA rules and explain them correctly in order to properly educate the fans.”
The tweet tagged Abdelnaby directly and included a video thread with examples to support their case.
It was a rare and unusually pointed move - not just defending the call, but calling out a broadcaster by name for questioning it. And that’s where this situation really took a turn.
Parsing the Play - Was It the Right Call?
Let’s break down the play itself. The NBA’s defense of the no-call hinges on the idea that Alexander-Walker’s momentum carried him into the backcourt, which is legal in the final two minutes. But there's some nuance here.
The league’s Last Two Minute Report referenced “momentum” as the deciding factor. However, when you look at the NBA rulebook - specifically Section III, E of the Out of Bounds and Throw-In section - the word “momentum” only appears once, and not in this context.
The rule states that in the last two minutes, the ball can be inbounded to either the frontcourt or backcourt. But if it’s inbounded to the frontcourt and the offensive player causes it to go into the backcourt without defensive contact, it’s a violation if they’re the first to touch it.
The league’s tweet included a clip of a completely different scenario - one where Domantas Sabonis had the ball poked away by Kelly Olynyk, and then chased it into the backcourt. That’s not what happened here.
In this Sixers-Hawks sequence, there was no deflection, no tip, no defensive touch. Alexander-Walker caught the ball, turned, and stepped back across the line under pressure.
So while the league says this was a legal play, it’s not hard to see why fans - and yes, broadcasters - are asking questions. This wasn’t a clear-cut case of a loose ball or a deflection.
It was an inbounds pass, caught cleanly, and then carried backward across the timeline. Whether or not Alexander-Walker had fully established possession before crossing is a judgment call - but it’s one that deserves a clearer, more respectful explanation.
The Bigger Issue: How the League Communicates
Calls like this are going to happen. NBA games are fast, emotional, and often come down to razor-thin margins.
That’s part of what makes the sport so compelling. But when the league sets up a system like the Last Two Minute Report to promote transparency, it only works if the communication around it is handled with professionalism and clarity.
What doesn’t help is the referees’ account taking aim at a broadcaster for doing his job - questioning a pivotal moment in a high-stakes game. Abdelnaby wasn’t out of line.
He was reacting in real time to a confusing play, just like the coach, the players, and plenty of fans. And when the explanation that follows is vague and supported by a completely different example, it only fuels the confusion.
The referees’ account says its mission is to “encourage communication, dialogue and transparency with NBA fans.” That’s a good goal.
But calling out a former player and respected analyst for asking a fair question doesn’t serve that mission. It creates more division, not clarity.
What’s Next for the Sixers
For Philadelphia, this loss stings. They had a chance to steal a win on the road, and it slipped away in the final seconds. The team has been in a number of close games this season, and moments like this one can have ripple effects - in the standings, in locker room morale, and in how the team approaches late-game execution.
Head coach Nick Nurse and his staff will no doubt review the tape and talk through the final sequence. But they’ll also be looking for consistency - not just from their players, but from the league that governs the game.
As for Alaa Abdelnaby? He’s long been a voice for Sixers fans, and he was doing what any good analyst should: calling it like he sees it.
In this case, that meant challenging a call that didn’t pass the eye test for a lot of people. That’s not a failure - that’s part of the job.
And it’s a conversation that’s worth having, as long as it’s rooted in respect and a shared love for the game.
The Sixers will move on. But the league might want to take a closer look at how it handles these situations - not just on the floor, but in the way it communicates off it.