Kentucky/Louisville

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by zm1283

If that's not flagrant, especially after seeing it on the replay, then I don't know what is.

Well, three very well respected officials that have done a lot higher games than any of us felt otherwise....even with numerous replay and time to consider it. Right or wrong, I think I'll go with their judgement. Something about it, in their opinion, must have been insufficient for a flagrant.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Well, three very well respected officials that have done a lot higher games than any of us felt otherwise....even with numerous replay and time to consider it. Right or wrong, I think I'll go with their judgement. Something about it, in their opinion, must have been insufficient for a flagrant.

I do not see this as a flagrant either. I see players fight for the ball and some contact that might be rough, but not flagrant. Then again, I am not one of those officials on the floor and I am watching with the benefit of replay on my couch. Just saying.

Peace

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Well, three very well respected officials that have done a lot higher games than any of us felt otherwise....even with numerous replay and time to consider it. Right or wrong, I think I'll go with their judgement. Something about it, in their opinion, must have been insufficient for a flagrant.

If you don't feel like it should have been a flagrant, cool. But, the reasoning above is total BS in my opinion.

Rut, mentioned why he thought it isn't flagrant; an opinion that will initiate conversation. JR said he thought it was flagrant; another opinion. Neither of those opinions are lemming-ish. I made that up for this special occasion!

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by tomegun

If you don't feel like it should have been a flagrant, cool. But, the reasoning above is total BS in my opinion.

Rut, mentioned why he thought it isn't flagrant; an opinion that will initiate conversation. JR said he thought it was flagrant; another opinion. Neither of those opinions are lemming-ish. I made that up for this special occasion!

I stated that I tought it was borderline in an earlier post...that I didn't think it was flagrant but believed before the call that a flagrant was a possible outcome of the review. Even though I didn't think it was flagrent, I wouldn't claim soneone was wrong who would call it flagrant.

The statement that I was responding to

"If that's not flagrant, especially after seeing it on the replay, then I don't know what is."

is clearly too strong given that three very credibile officials didn't call it flagrant.

I didn't feel I needed to repeat my specific opinion.

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I stated that I tought it was borderline in an earlier post...that I didn't think it was flagrant but believed before the call that a flagrant was a possible outcome of the review. Even though I didn't think it was flagrent, I wouldn't claim soneone was wrong who would call it flagrant.

The statement that I was responding to

"If that's not flagrant, especially after seeing it on the replay, then I don't know what is."

is clearly too strong given that three very credibile officials didn't call it flagrant.

I didn't feel I needed to repeat my specific opinion.

I made my comment in reference to your statement that went along with the officials on the game merely because they do a lot of games. I think that is weak logic. If you had an opinion of your own that was previously stated I would have no problem with that.