The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jan 29, 2010, 10:07am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 95
Focusing only on the elbow, I have an intentional foul at the absolute minimum. Hard to understand how anyone could argue that this was not "excessive contact". I also agree that in slow-mo, it looks flagrant. Not sure I would have picked that up in real time.
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jan 29, 2010, 10:16am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by jearef View Post
Focusing only on the elbow, I have an intentional foul at the absolute minimum. Hard to understand how anyone could argue that this was not "excessive contact". I also agree that in slow-mo, it looks flagrant. Not sure I would have picked that up in real time.
How would you compare this excessive contact to a 140lb point guard getting completely pancaked by a "slightly" illegal screen set by a 250lb center? I say "slightly" so you assume that maybe the screener was just slightly leaning, but it isn't like he stuck an arm out and clotheslined the kid. Are you calling an intentional there? Just food for thought..
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jan 29, 2010, 11:46am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 50
don't pass on calls

Nothing worse than seeing a player get injured. it appears the injured girl had committed a foul but very hard to say for sure. The ref was there and if a foul was committed it had to be called (probably holding) The offensive girl knew she was there as she just broke away from the alleged hold. However, you must always be in control of your body, you do not have the right to pivot if the defender is there legally. Her elbow was well into the defender's space and a foul had to be called. When referees do not make calls, players take care of business and I think that is what happened here. Rough play must be dealt with by the officials or else players will do what we see. Was this an isolated incident within the game or was this a final buildup to a lack of calls?
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jan 29, 2010, 12:26pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee View Post
You do know that you can have a flagrant technical foul, right?

If the elbow came after the foul call on the black player, then your choices are:
1) intentional technical foul
2) flagrant technical foul.

You can't call a personal foul or a straight technical foul because dead-ball contact was involved.

Note that's using NFHS rules. The NCAA rules are different, I think.
Yes I do thanks for clarifying JR, I did not spell it out as clearly. The point I was trying to make is that if you are not going to call either an intentional technical or flagrant technical in this case, it is tough to argue that you have an intentional/flagrant while the ball is live.
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 31, 2010, 02:04pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 50
canadian game-fiba rules

It seems many of you have not noticed that this is a Canadian university game played under FIBA rules. You CANNOT have a technical foul if contact occurs, it must be a personal foul, common or flagrant but not a T. There is no such thing as intentional fouls in FIBA, it is unsportsman. The fact there was no call at any point on this play is interesting. However, the elbow to the head should have been called. For sure a personal and if deemed excessive then an unsportsman which is not an ejection but two and the ball. If it was deemed and it wasn't by the ref for some reason, on purpose and with intent, then it must be a flagrant personal and an ejection. The signal for this is both arms raised in a U position. In FIBA, even if the whistle had gone and you have contact between players in a dead ball, it cannot be a T. This is unlike other rules which dead ball contact is a T
Reply With Quote
  #21 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 31, 2010, 02:31pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 73
I agree there is probably a foul before the elbow; hard to know definitively on this video.

If there was no call before the elbow, I have this as a flagrant foul. The contact was excessive, where the elbow was swung at a speed that exceeded the rest of the body. This would be a flagrant in NCAA-M as mentioned in the points of emphasis, and to me generally a good rule of thumb to follow in determining what is excessive.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Right Call or Wrong Call Johnny Ringo Football 24 Thu Oct 15, 2009 06:19pm
When the obvious call isn't the right call Don Mueller Baseball 28 Mon Aug 20, 2007 01:46am
ASA OBS call then no call leads to ejection DaveASA/FED Softball 28 Mon Jul 12, 2004 03:52pm
To call or not to call foul ball DaveASA/FED Softball 11 Thu Jun 24, 2004 11:47am
More Pacers/Pistons call/no call OverAndBack Basketball 36 Thu Jun 03, 2004 07:01pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:52am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1