Illegal screen to flagrant foul?

[Rich]

Watching it live?

White 42 holds (uncalled) and then commits a flagrant foul.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Rich

Watching it live?

White 42 holds (uncalled) and then commits a flagrant foul.

Agree

[Multiple Sports]

Bloom,

What county... if this is an inbounds play there is no excuse for no whistle. a good two man crew could pick this up....

[Bloom]

Originally Posted by Multiple Sports

Bloom,

What county... if this is an inbounds play there is no excuse for no whistle. a good two man crew could pick this up....

Anne Arundel, Broadneck vs. South River.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Multiple Sports

Bloom,

What county... if this is an inbounds play there is no excuse for no whistle. a good two man crew could pick this up....

Pick what up?

[HokiePaul]

If the screen was illegal by black, it would be for the leg/hip extended out. I'd be fine with no call on the screen.

But the officials did miss a hold (or two) on white which maybe could have stopped the play with just a common foul on White.

I wish we had a wider view to see the officials, and also more time after the foul to see how the officials reacted.

[NNJOfficial]

Originally Posted by HokiePaul

If the screen was illegal by black, it would be for the leg/hip extended out. I'd be fine with no call on the screen.

But the officials did miss a hold (or two) on white which maybe could have stopped the play with just a common foul on White.

I wish we had a wider view to see the officials, and also more time after the foul to see how the officials reacted.

I agree. You really need some context in order to understand what's going on. Had the two players been going at it earlier in the game and should that have been addressed?

There is an illegal screen. Black moves and extends her hip. Perhaps time, score and the way the game had been called dictated passing on it, but it is still an illegal screen.

Clearly there is then an extended hold that deserved a whistle prior to the flagrant foul. I'm willing to bet this isn't the first altercation between those two during that game.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by NNJOfficial

I agree. You really need some context in order to understand what's going on. Had the two players been going at it earlier in the game and should that have been addressed?

There is an illegal screen. Black moves and extends her hip. Perhaps time, score and the way the game had been called dictated passing on it, but it is still an illegal screen.

Clearly there is then an extended hold that deserved a whistle prior to the flagrant foul. I'm willing to bet this isn't the first altercation between those two during that game.

That's a legal screen. Contact is on the torso, which is above the left leg. The right leg is extended out, but there's no contact over there. This matters.
On top of that, the defense switched pretty quick and the defender gave up trying to get through the screen.

[Multiple Sports]

Originally Posted by Adam

Pick what up?

The hold on the girl who punches the player....

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Multiple Sports

The hold on the girl who punches the player....

gotcha. I was still on the OP theme of wondering about the screen.
I would have had that hold, and judging by her attitude, a T following.

[biggravy]

I have a no call on the screen, but a common foul on 42. Get that it probably doesn't escalate. Not on this trip anyway. Agree 2 man sucks, but this is still an easy get.

[rockyroad]

Why do coaches try to say that a missed call "led to" the flagrant their player committed. Aren't coaches supposed to preach and teach responsibility and integrity to the players - but then they turn around and say it is the officials fault that their kid just pulled some cheap crap like the illegal block in the back on this video? That's just stupid...

[walt]

To me the screen is illegal and missed by the crew. W42 holds and is not called. Then comes the flagrant and W42 doesn't get to play any more on this day.