Quote:
Originally Posted by Brad
I think that the point people are making is about fouls that come *after* a player should have been thrown out of the game —*not just a single play.
If there was a flagrant foul (or several) in a game by a single player and the referees allowed the player to stay in the game, a case could be made for negligence by the officials.
A couple of intentional fouls might have changed the tone of the game a bit (force the coach to talk to his punk-a$$ player and tell him to back off) ... and play #5 was flagrant by any definition. It's a travesty that 34 was allowed to stay in the game after that one.
|
Well I think that would be adding stuff that we have no information on. I doubt a flagrant foul was even called. Now whether is should be is another issue, but I doubt a court is going to decide that based on this tape.
Peace