Charrrrrrrge it!

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Rich

https://twitter.com/marchmadness/sta...HR9S4NQt0UuffY

Why is it that every time a defender hits the deck, the word "flop" is thrown around by people who clearly have no clue what it means?

Agree. He may have embellished a couple of those, but they were, with possibly one exception, correct calls. Embellishment doesn't negate the relevant rules. On one, he appears to still be sliding in after the shooter left the floor.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Agree. He may have embellished a couple of those, but they were, with possibly one exception, correct calls. Embellishment doesn't negate the relevant rules. On one, he appears to still be sliding in after the shooter left the floor.

You're talking about the third one, I think. Bang bang. The rest were easy for any decent official.

[Pantherdreams]

Great video for discussion.

I would agree where there a several in there where he doesn't have to go down. He could bounce back or fight to keep his balance. The fact that he doesn't have to fall doesn't negate what the offense is doing in these situations. I agree there is one where he may still be moving in on an airborne shooter but other than that I can live with all these calls.

If there was an official who wanted to no call some and say they felt like the contact was incidental and the embellishment was why he became disadvantaged I could probably live with that on a couple. But if there are blocks (except the airborne shooter play in question) or tech's being called on any of these I would not support that.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I had a Charge on all four of them.

MTD, Sr.

[Paintguru]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I had a Charge on all four of them.

MTD, Sr.

Agreed. #3 I could perhaps debate as a no-call.