D3 Player Takes Cheap Shot

[Rich]

The shooter / victim shot the FT.

Looks like simply a flagrant 2 according to the box score / play by play.

[eyezen]

Clear case of OOO

he was no longer an air born shooter, i got incidental contact, play on

[ChuckS]

Originally Posted by bucky

Wish more video was available. Probably is if one digs. I am curious as to why that player did that. What would provoke such an incident? Did the offended player make some previous threat or perform a dirty play that went unnoticed? It had to have been something. No one does that without a reason. Not saying it would be a valid reason, just saying that something triggered him.

As you said, not a valid reason, but he appeared to be fouled by the kid he assaulted, on an airball 3-pt attempt just prior. I had to replay the video several times and stop it, but if you do that, it looks like contact.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWcrJ18yjok

[Rufus]

Originally Posted by eyezen

Clear case of OOO

he was no longer an air born shooter, i got incidental contact, play on

Ok, you win the internet today!

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by Rich

The shooter / victim shot the FT.

Looks like simply a flagrant 2 according to the box score / play by play.

Interesting, I thought it said he went out of the game for concussion protocol.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by ChuckS

As you said, not a valid reason, but he appeared to be fouled by the kid he assaulted, on an airball 3-pt attempt just prior. I had to replay the video several times and stop it, but if you do that, it looks like contact.

Ok, I’m glad you brought this up and that we have the preceding possession clipped now. This is worth discussing from a mechanics and game management standpoint. I’m not excusing the criminal (that’s what I’m going to call him), but let’s look at what the C on the preceding possession could have done better. The criminal is above the C, and C has an open low look between him and the defender. Then the criminal dribbles low and straightlines the C, who at this point in the game had apparently checked out because he made no effort to improve his view. He should have opened high to get a look between the players (but instead he was planted like a tree). All the more so because L was rotating his way, but even if not, C has GOT to make that adjustment. ESPECIALLY since the criminal had been T’d earlier in the game and was probably already a GFU. By not seeing the foul on the 3-try, the criminal’s fire was fueled, and we all saw the result.

Important to officiate the last five minutes with the same effort as the first five, especially with a GFU on the court. Keep working for open looks until the final horn.

Preventative officiating could have...well...prevented this. Lesson learned for all of us.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JRutledge]

This is only an F2 foul in college (which the level of the game that took place) or a Flagrant Foul in HS. It matters where we put the ball or who shoots the FTs. You cannot have a live ball contact Technical. I think if we call anything else we are just making up our own rules.

Peace

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

This is only an F2 foul in college (which the level of the game that took place) or a Flagrant Foul in HS. It matters where we put the ball or who shoots the FTs. You cannot have a live ball contact Technical. I think if we call anything else we are just making up our own rules.

Peace

The ball is close enough to being dead that I'd hardly have an issue with an F2 technical foul. Yes I think F2 personal is the correct ruling, but F2 technical would hardly be an egregious error.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SC Official

The ball is close enough to being dead that I'd hardly have an issue with an F2 technical foul. Yes I think F2 personal is the correct ruling, but F2 technical would hardly be an egregious error.

Close?? The only way I am calling that is if I have a monitor. While the game is going on I would call this or consider this a live play or action.

Peace

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Close?? The only way I am calling that is if I have a monitor. While the game is going on I would call this or consider this a live play or action.

Peace

Great, and Rich said without replay he'd have an F2 technical. The ball is closer than you seem to think to being dead (it's already in the net when the contact occurs).

Two respected posters, two different opinions.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SC Official

Great, and Rich said without replay he'd have an F2 technical. The ball is closer than you seem to think to being dead (it's already in the net when the contact occurs).

Two respected posters, two different opinions.

I'm just saying, we were told without monitors we have to be completely right. We cannot guess or speculate, we have to know. And likely we would have to have 2 officials verify that took place as well. I am just saying this from a self-preservation standpoint. And most of the plays are not this hard to officiate. Even the Hook and Hold plays are not this complicated as to what makes it a Flagrant Foul.

And the ball has to be completely through the net to be dead, not just in the net. If there is any doubt, I am considering the ball live. Just like I would with other similar fouls where a common foul or a dead ball contact foul would be at issue.

Peace

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I'm just saying, we were told without monitors we have to be completely right. We cannot guess or speculate, we have to know. And likely we would have to have 2 officials verify that took place as well. I am just saying this from a self-preservation standpoint. And most of the plays are not this hard to officiate. Even the Hook and Hold plays are not this complicated as to what makes it a Flagrant Foul.

And the ball has to be completely through the net to be dead, not just in the net. If there is any doubt, I am considering the ball live. Just like I would with other similar fouls where a common foul or a dead ball contact foul would be at issue.

Peace

I didn't say the ball was dead, I said it was close enough to being dead that ruling a technical rather than personal foul would not be something to lose sleep over.

I have stated more than once that this is an F2PF for me.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SC Official

I didn't say the ball was dead, I said it was close enough to being dead that ruling a technical rather than personal foul would not be something to lose sleep over.

You have to speak for yourself on this one. I would be worried about this if it was not supported by the video. I want to beat the tape anytime I can. But this might very for who you work with or the coaches you encounter. I do not want to call something that I cannot completely support.

Peace

[Rich]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

You have to speak for yourself on this one. I would be worried about this if it was not supported by the video. I want to beat the tape anytime I can. But this might very for who you work with or the coaches you encounter. I do not want to call something that I cannot completely support.



Peace

If you are sure, fine. But what if it went the other way and the ball was completely through the net when the foul happened and you called a flagrant 2? You'd be just as wrong, just the other way.

The T has a guy get coldcocked in the corner - I'd hope any supervisor would focus on the important issue - that the player was ejected.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

You have to speak for yourself on this one. I would be worried about this if it was not supported by the video. I want to beat the tape anytime I can. But this might very for who you work with or the coaches you encounter. I do not want to call something that I cannot completely support.

Are you naive enough to think the average coach knows the rules well enough to know whether this play is an F2PF or F2TF?

The offender was ejected and the offended team got two FTs and the ball-that is the only thing that a coach would care about.