Duke-VaTech player punched in throat

[fiasco]

https://twitter.com/TreyWallace_/sta...hE_IcwDheVPqsQ

I believe the officials had no call, then went to the monitor to review and determined no F1 or F2.

Seems like there's room in the F1 language to cover this situation. I'm kind of at a loss as to the decision to no-call this.

[Raymond]

I think they don't go with anything because he's not intending to do anything. He's turning to run up the court and celebrate and he has a player right behind him.

There was no intention and the opponent didn't give him any room to turn around and move.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by Raymond

I think they don't go with anything because he's not intending to do anything. He's turning to run up the court and celebrate and he has a player right behind him.

There was no intention and the opponent didn't give him any room to turn around and move.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Is intent required?

h) Contact with an opponent that is not the result of a normal basketball play� "Normal basketball play" is defined as any activity by a player, including incidental contact, which is generally accepted as that which occurs in a basketball game when the player is attempting to make a legal offensive or defensive play�

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by fiasco

Is intent required?

Reread what you quoted. It says "not the result of a normal basketball play". This was incidental contact created by the player turning to run up court normally and celebrate normally. The player even pulled this hand back as soon as contact was made. Opponent gave him no room to turn around and move up court.

You asked what the thought process could have been and I'm providing it to you. You may not agree with it, it doesn't mean that thought process doesn't exist.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[JRutledge]

Nothing here.

Peace

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Reread what you quoted. It says "not the result of a normal basketball play". This was incidental contact created by the player turning to run up court normally and celebrate normally. The player even pulled this hand back as soon as contact was made. Opponent gave him no room to turn around and move up court.

You asked what the thought process could have been and I'm providing it to you. You may not agree with it, it doesn't mean that thought process doesn't exist.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

I quoted it because the flagrant rule explicitly allows for penalizing contact that is not intentional in nature, but is nevertheless severe in nature.

You are the one who brought up intent, as if that's a pre-requisite for a flagrant foul. It is not.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by fiasco

I quoted it because the flagrant rule explicitly allows for penalizing contact that is not intentional in nature, but is nevertheless severe in nature.

You are the one who brought up intent, as if that's a pre-requisite for a flagrant foul. It is not.

Yes, but if someone runs into someone, we do not start penalizing them for fouls if it is clearly unintentional or not something reckless. The guy was kind of in the wrong spot when coming up the court. So yes intent does not matter, but it kind of matters when nothing was doing to hurt or strike the other player and the player let up when he realized who was in front of him. It would have been the same if the backed up and ran into the opponent.

Peace

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Yes, but if someone runs into someone, we do not start penalizing them for fouls if it is clearly unintentional or not something reckless. The guy was kind of in the wrong spot when coming up the court. So yes intent does not matter, but it kind of matters when nothing was doing to hurt or strike the other player and the player let up when he realized who was in front of him. It would have been the same if the backed up and ran into the opponent.

Peace

Thanks, JRut. That's helpful context.

[Multiple Sports]

Just spoke with the NCAA Rules Editor. Officials were correct. Good no call.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by fiasco

I quoted it because the flagrant rule explicitly allows for penalizing contact that is not intentional in nature, but is nevertheless severe in nature.

You are the one who brought up intent, as if that's a pre-requisite for a flagrant foul. It is not.

We don't call F1/F2s simply because contact is severe.

F1 definition: A flagrant 1 personal foul is a personal foul that is deemed excessive in nature (unwarranted or too much) and/or unnecessary (avoidable, uncalled for or not required by the circumstances of the play) but is not based solely on the severity of the act.

You pulled up one EXAMPLE (and the rule book lists them as examples) of what could qualify as an F1. Paragraphs "c", "d," and "g" are intentional acts.

"h" deals with NON-BASKETBALL PLAYS. The VT player was attempting to run up court and raise his arm either in celebration or to point to a teammate. He did not do anything reckless or out of the ordinary. On top of that he immediately retracted his arm upon contact. The Duke player simply put himself in the wrong place at the wrong time.

[frezer11]

Pretty sure we're going Class B tech for that flop.

[MechanicGuy]

Originally Posted by frezer11

Pretty sure we're going Class B tech for that flop.

The player who got hit was vomiting in the huddle. I don't think he was acting.