Call or No-call?

[canuckrefguy]

Not sure if anybody's done this one yet....call or no-call?

SMU awaits ruling on Milito suspension - Nova Scotia News - TheChronicleHerald.ca

[JRutledge]

It looked to me like there was a foul before the elbow. Or at the very least a tie up with the ball. Not sure how you do not have a call on something. That being said I am not completely sure this was intentional other than the player trying to free themselves from the contact. That being said, something should be called hear if nothing else but a player control foul if you there was nothing called before that. Now I am not sure that I would necessarily call an intentional, but it is certainly OK if that is what you want to call. But to call nothing is just bad.

Peace

[Juulie Downs]

Yea, I think there's gotta be a foul, just a normal PC foul. The article called it a "wild" pivot, which I think it was, and not within the player's allowed space. I suppose it could be an intentional as "excessive" contact...

There might have been a Fed elbow violation just before that, she clearly pulled both elbows up apparently to clear space.

[just another ref]

Looked flagrant to me. Violent, savage, the whole bit.

[representing]

If not a personal, flagrant or intentional foul, I would have called a walk.

[mbyron]

What is that official doing standing over the injured player? That's looking for trouble no matter what he called.

There was a lot of contact before white swung her elbow. I doubt I'd have a flagrant here, and the contact ended up being "excessive" only because black had her face down by white's elbow. Clean up the contact on rebounders and they won't be swinging elbows like that.

[hoopguy]

I have a flagrant.

Can somebody give the proper mechanics and penaties for a live ball flagrant such as this? I am not 100% sure.

[Skarecrow]

Originally Posted by hoopguy

I have a flagrant.

Can somebody give the proper mechanics and penaties for a live ball flagrant such as this? I am not 100% sure.

Definitely flagrant....In slow motion, it shows her lower, raise and deliver a violent elbow....maybe the ref didn't see it as clear (no slo-mo for him), but still flagrant in my book.....

[slow whistle]

Originally Posted by Skarecrow

Definitely flagrant....In slow motion, it shows her lower, raise and deliver a violent elbow....maybe the ref didn't see it as clear (no slo-mo for him), but still flagrant in my book.....

Not sure if I agree that this is flagrant without being there. It is hard to tell if the girl is tied up (either her being held or the ball being held), so part of the violent contact could be due just to the momentum of freeing herself from that. Just because the outcome/impact is violent doesn't mean the act necessarily is.

Follow-on question to all, what do you do if you have a whistle for a hold on black and just as you have your whistle, then white comes out with this elbow? Are you calling a technical or flagrant?

[slow whistle]

Originally Posted by hoopguy

I have a flagrant.

Can somebody give the proper mechanics and penaties for a live ball flagrant such as this? I am not 100% sure.

There is no signal for flagrant, just do your normal foul signal and when you report to the table indicate to them that the foul was flagrant and the player is disqualified.

[wildcatter]

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.