Youtube video

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

For the FT shooter leaving the semi-circle before the ball hit the ring/backboard?

Yup, that was a violation.

And furthermore, the ball never did hit the ring, which is a violation all by itself.

But I sure wouldn't call the foul that did get called "flagrant". It was just a clueless kid who all of a sudden saw someone coming towrad him and sort of ducked to avoid getting nailed. Good call, but not flagrant.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

1) And furthermore, the ball never did hit the ring, which is a violation all by itself.

2) But I sure wouldn't call the foul that did get called "flagrant". It was just a clueless kid who all of a sudden saw someone coming towrad him and sort of ducked to avoid getting nailed. Good call, but not flagrant.

We must be watching different videos.....

1) I though that the ball just ticked the front of the ring and came straight down on the second FT. That's why they headed up-court with no throw-in.

2) Looked to me like the defender went sideways and then low-bridged the offensive player. Always a dangerous act. I'd have thought very seriously about calling that sucker flagrant.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

We must be watching different videos.....

1) I though that the ball just ticked the front of the ring and came straight down on the second FT. That's why they headed up-court with no throw-in.

I suppose it might have but the arc looks pretty pure to me.

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

2) Looked to me like the defender went sideways and then low-bridged the offensive player. Always a dangerous act. I'd have thought very seriously about calling that sucker flagrant.

I'll go back and look at it again.

[deecee]

pretty obvious that kid doesnt belong on the court.

looks flagrant to me and i wouldnt think seriously about it -- kids gone -- he should stick to whatever keeps him off any playing field/court

[Jimgolf]

Originally Posted by deecee

pretty obvious that kid doesnt belong on the court.

Amen. After the turnaround jumper on the second FT, I'd recommend a drug test for this Bozo.

[Z REF]

Opportunity to make the game "better" and get control over the circus being called a game. See post on the camp situation for further reference. Flagrant foul, have a nice day.

P.S., use the morning to improve your golf game or go fishin' with the boy and forgo the $10.

[Bad Zebra]

Originally Posted by Z REF

P.S., use the morning to improve your golf game or go fishin' with the boy and forgo the $10.

Great attitude. Penalize the other 9 guys on the floor because of one goofball? Chances are some of them actually love the game and are developing actual skills. If everyone took that attitude, no one officiates for the young kids coming up. They're left with OS.

[SamIAm]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

We must be watching different videos.....

1) I though that the ball just ticked the front of the ring and came straight down on the second FT. That's why they headed up-court with no throw-in.

2) Looked to me like the defender went sideways and then low-bridged the offensive player. Always a dangerous act. I'd have thought very seriously about calling that sucker flagrant.

2)... I would not have thought very long about calling it flagrant. X-Flagrant!

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by SamIAm

X-Flagrant!

Not being smart but what is an "X-Flagrant"?

[deecee]

its like X-treme football and X-treme "anything"

its a flagrant to the "X"

which has a derivative that is the inverse of the Y-flagrant that could best be explained as X-flagrant=1/(whiny coach*team fouls)^Y-flagrant -- or "catwoman" for simplicity sake.

and i can comment on "Not being smart..." but that wouldn't be a stretch would it lol

[ChrisSportsFan]

I thought the ball barely tipped the rim.

As far as the wrong colored undershirt...it's obviously not a serious league. Most of those kids do not look like they are in basketball shape and the kid shooting the turn around fade-away free throw are good clues.

When you've got kids like that with no body control, sometimes crazy stuff happens. The defender thought he could influence the dribbler by stepping in front of him. When he realized he was about to get trucked, he ducked and big haired boy goes flying. Hope he wasn't hurt.

[co2ice]

I say it was legal tackle, the ball was dislodged due to contact, and thus is ruled a fumble, play stands as called its 1st and ten!!!! I've seen plenty of that in my church games!!!

[SamIAm]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Not being smart but what is an "X-Flagrant"?

I was using the X to signify the crossed arms. Just extra emphasis.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by SamIAm

I was using the X to signify the crossed arms. Just extra emphasis.

That's what I was afraid of....

Wrong signal. The crossed arms is the signal for an intentional foul, not a flagrant foul. It's signal #34 on the NFHS chart. Intentional fouls and flagrant fouls are completely different animals, with completely different penalties. There is no official signal for a flagrant foul. A lot of officials do use the old baseball umpire heave-ho though.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

A lot of officials do use the old baseball umpire heave-ho though.

I eject someone thusly: