Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref
First you write that the decision of flagrant or not " is dependent on the situation."
But in the next breath you state that you would base your decision NOT on the play at hand, but on how the player has previously behaved during the contest! 
Are you freakin' nuts?
And what in the heck is a proven game interrupter? I can't wait until JR comes back and sees your post. |
I hate to disappoint you, Nevada, but I thought that Ben made some valid points in that post. Whether the call should be flagrant in nature or not is always a subjective judgment to be made by the calling official. And a player being previously warned or called for similar acts previously in that game(as in "putting crap in your game") should be taken into consideration when making that subjective judgment. It's no different than calling an ABS technical foul imo. And that's where the "proven game interrupter" comes into play also. While I personally hate that particular term, I do understand the context that I think Ben is trying to put it in. He can correct me if I'm wrong but I think that he's just stating that we should be aware if that particular player was involved in any other similar non-basketball incidents previously in the same game. Personally, I put that down as being good advice and good game awareness also. If that's the second or third time that player has caught a defender in the head with an elbow, that's sureashell gonna factor into any call that I make also.
I thought that btaylor made some solid, pertinent points in his post. And I agree with those comments for whatever that might be worth.