I don't mean this in an offensive manner, but do you officiate basketball? That is absolutely a foul!

Last night, a similar play happened in the UCONN/Virginia Tech game. The officials called the foul and went to the monitor to see if it was flagrant - I can't look at the play in this thread from work, but if I remember right it was more contact than the play last night.

The foul last night was an easy foul and the only thing in question was to determine if it was flagrant. Jim Calhoun ended up getting a T for saying something to the official about this.

I'm evolving on this one....here was my most recent reply that you evidently didn't read:

"Still working it out....here's what I see:

almost simoultaneously, the offensive player pivots forward towards defender who is also moving forward into and has two hands on the offensive player's torso.

it's easy to see why the pc foul was called because the upper, outside part of the offensive player's arm makes contact with defensive player....it's not so easy to see the defensive player made first contact.

hats off to the defender for drawing the foul "

Travel
 

There was a travel before the foul. The pivot foot slid, What came first ?
Look close.

Nice, BOFARMA. I'm gonna self check here and hold my tongue.

Now keeping in mind that I've only got that one angle on the call so i can't see how much contact occurs with the defenders chest/face/upper torso before he starts to bail out (and this does look like a bail out).

I think you've got to call a foul on this unless your going to warn the d for flopping. You can't let kids swing to clear off and his eblows are sending kids to the floor then that has to be a foul. I haven't got a flagrant because he's not head hunting and is pivoting to rip through a tight defender who was creating some contact too.

I hate the idea or the comments made by Rautins about questionable calls on good players. You know what, if you build your team around a couple of stars or a style of play you need a certain person to operate then you roll the dice with that player getting hurt and staying out of foul trouble. Refs shouldn't have to feel like their punishing teams because so-so is in foul trouble.

I can appreciate the coaches frustration especially since if you wathced the other quarterfinal games and semi's particualrly the Carlton games there was way more contact in all sorts of ways being nocalled.

I read your post...so what? This is one reason for watching video and learning from video. What you see on your screen is a foul. Drop that knowledge in your tool bag get ready to learn the next thing.

May I suggest you check the attitude at the "door" when entering the forum?

Read BOFARMA's post, watch the video again, then tell me if you still have a PC foul.

Do you think the player laying on the ground grabbing his head is a symptom of flopping?

If we want to be that "technical," I am still calling a foul. But that will be a technical foul which might be flagrant. ;)

Peace

1- At no point during the video is the player grabbing his head.

2 - I've reffed enough soccer kids to appreciate a full sell job as opposed to a momentary one.

3 - The way he falls (back and legs first, followed by head directly backwards) after a shot to the upper torso and head from the side doesn't align enough for me to believe he was being knocked off his spot as much as he was bailing out away from the contact.

But as i said I'm not there in real life and am unable to see how much contact is occuring before he falls back so from this vantage point I've got an offensive foul.

No kidding. I can't believe anyone would try to figure out a way to not call this elbow to the chops.

It isn't an attitude. It is a foul and the only thing to decide on is if it is flagrant or not. Video is used so officials can see plays and a lot of times that includes someone saying, "This is a foul...make sure we get plays like this." You have spent several posts rationalizing NOT calling a foul when most on the forum are saying it is easily a foul. I also referenced a less severe play that happened on national TV last night similar to this one. And yet, you can't accept that it is a foul.

So what is your "developing" opinion? Is it a foul or not a foul? For most of us, we have talked about this, seen videos similar to this and our "developing" opinion would come in the form of a whistle a split second after contact occurs. You can talk about where the defender was and what the offensive player was trying do all day long. After you get done with all of that, you have player who was hit with an elbow - it doesn't matter if he acted after the fact - and a decision to make. The decision you make could impact how the rest of the game goes. What are you going to do?

I still have a PC foul.

I could watch that play 4,546,389 times and I'd still have a PC foul every single time. And every single time, I'd also give thought every single time as to whether to also call it flagrant or not because of it being such an obvious shot to an opponent's head.

But that's just me.:)

If anybody starts letting plays like that go by labelling them as an "incidental contact", then in my opinion they're going to be in for a very, very short officiating career. You'll see elbows to the head flying at the other end of the court also, and if you call a foul on one of them you'll have a war on your hands. If it's incidental contact at one end of the court, it had better be incidental contact at the other end also.

It doesn't appear that anyone is trying to figure out a way to 'no call' this situation.

It does appear that several posters jumped on it and called it a PC foul.

Recent discussion, i.e. traveling, legitimately compromises that conclusion. And, the video clearly supports the argument.

That is as subjective as the day is long.