Derek Fisher is such a great guy, he would never commit a foul, and Joey Crawford is such a class act that he would never call an inappropriate foul

I read about 4 or 5 major sports articles on the Game 4 no-call on Brent Barry after Derek Fisher fell into him. The basic jist of each article was "yes, technically it was a foul, but [insert some absurd rationalization] not calling it a foul was the correct call".

First of all, it was a foul. Fisher fell right on top of him. Ran right into them. Berry had to go home and take a pregnancy test. The refs might be excused late in some important games to let some contact go on a final shot, but this leniency would never exclude calling such an obvious and egregious foul. Of course it wasn't a shooting foul, it was a foul on the floor, which would have nevertheless resulted in a chance for 2 game tying free throws.

Secondly, why is everyone drinking the NBA Kook-Aid and buying that it shouldn't have been called for some reason. I'm notoriously anti-conspiracy theory, but you don't really need one here; the ref had a personal vendetta against the main player on the other team, evidenced by a very insane public meltdown. Why he's working the game I have no idea, and its suspicious to say the least, but apart from any conspiracy theories, when a ref with such a publicized personal vendetta makes such an insanely obvious non-call, why does the media excuse this call? This is especailly perplexing when they have bend over backwards to invent some bizarre rationalization about why this obvious fould shouldn't have been called.

Final Note: I had enough of reading that Berry, Greg Popovich, and Tim Duncan agreed there shouldn't have been a call. Of course they didn't agree; they said they agreed because the call couldn't be changed, and its best for the team not to dwell on it or have a media circus around the issue.