Nasty ending to St. John's at Seton Hall
 

Nasty ending to St. John's at Seton Hall.
Lavin gets two Ts in about 3 seconds after yelling at one of the officials.
With about a dozen seconds remaining a St. John's player makes a hard foul to prevent a show-off dunk by Seton Hall, which was winning the game, and John Cahill called a flagrant personal and tossed him.

I'll note that he gave the intentional signal first, before making it clear that he was ejecting the offender, which is something that I've recently advocated in order to make it clear to everyone that the official isn't just calling a common foul since there isn't a signal for a flagrant foul. I would like to see the NFHS add that signal this summer.

What do others think?

I agree with you.

One Video Is Worth A Thousand Words ...
 

You mean like this:

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/B6f6pY3X-78" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I thought he called the original foul an intentional, then dumped the St. John's player for taunting the Seton Hall guy he just put on the ground....

How many FTs were awarded? ;)

<table class="mod-data mod-pbp" border="1" width="100%"><tbody><tr class="odd"><td valign="top" width="50">0:08</td><td valign="top">Flagrant Foul on Justin Burrell (Ejected)</td><td style="text-align: center;" valign="top" nowrap="nowrap">70-84</td><td valign="top"> </td></tr> <tr class="even"><td valign="top" width="50">0:08</td><td valign="top"> </td><td style="text-align: center;" valign="top" nowrap="nowrap">70-84</td><td valign="top">Anali Okoloji missed Free Throw.</td></tr> <tr class="odd"><td valign="top" width="50">0:08</td><td valign="top">
</td><td style="text-align: center;" valign="top" nowrap="nowrap">70-84</td><td valign="top"> </td></tr> <tr class="even"><td valign="top" width="50">0:08</td><td valign="top"> </td><td style="text-align: center;" valign="top" nowrap="nowrap">70-84</td><td valign="top">Anali Okoloji missed Free Throw.</td></tr> <tr class="odd"><td valign="top" width="50">0:00</td><td colspan="3" style="text-align: center;">End Game</td></tr></tbody></table>

Talking heads at halftime of the next game are already talking about the ejection and how the first one was too fast. :rolleyes: I'm more surprised that the second was issued that quickly (which was justly deserved).

As far the flagrant foul call, I completely agree with it. There was a good wind up, impact that was shoulder high, and a nice push and follow through that sent the player a good distance out of bounds. I don't believe for a second the player was trying to make a play on the ball and was making a frustration play.

1. Lavin got the first T and then leaned in and clearly said something unacceptable and immediately got a 2nd. Joe Lindsay was the official.

2. He was ticked due to the action of the held ball at the other end just prior. That could have been handled better. Tony Greene got between the players and held the St. John's guy back.
I thought a T on the Seton Hall player would have been a quality decision to calm down the tempers. The flagrant at the other end was a direct result imo.

Oh I believe the technical were warranted. I'm just saying from what I've seen watching NCAA games, it seems like it's pretty difficult to earn a second T. Case in point, when we discussed Coach K's first T and his subsequent actions afterward. It's clear that Lavin said the magic words and was appropriately dumped.

I believe your account of the end since I was not able to catch the game. It does certainly sound like that action that preceded the flagrant could of been handled better. Perhaps I'll be able to find a clip of the end later on tonight. From what you described, the flagrant foul call became that much easier to call.

You can see plays in question here:

Seton Hall Stuns St. John's - ESPN Video - ESPN

And the player was not going in for a "show off" dunk. He was just going to lay the ball in.

You can watch the replay of the entire game on ESPN.com if you have one of the internet services which permits that. Go to the link below and click on the "watch replay" button. Just fast forward to the end.

St. John's Red Storm vs. Seton Hall Pirates - Box Score - March 03, 2011 - ESPN

Read Lavins lips on the second technical, he is saying:
"you suck, you suck, you piece of sh*t."


For the flagrant foul, I think Cahill was just gonna go with the intentional till the St. John player starting taunting the Seton Hall player and just upgraded to a flagrant instead of a intentional and technical.

Your guess is as good as mine. I thought the player was going to celebrate the win by slamming it home and the St. John's player wasn't going to allow that.

I don't see any taunting. He simply stands still. Perhaps verbal. I can't tell. I believe that Cahill tossed him for the foul, not anything else.

[QUOTE= I don't see any taunting. He simply stands still. Perhaps verbal. I can't tell. I believe that Cahill tossed him for the foul, not anything else.[/QUOTE]

My opinion he stands over him and stares him down.
Just my observation.

The red player didn't take any steps (maaaaybe half-a-step) beyond what was necessary to stop after making illegal contact. He did have a half-assed arm movement towards the white player, but I do believe that he said something.

I bet that if red "stopped on a dime" (an untypical act) and didn't say anything to white, red may have received just an INT.

The DQ is a good call as far as I am concerned.

I'm okay with the officials not issuing T's with the action that preceded the flagrant. I just thought the Seton Hall player was off balance and held on to the ball. I didn't think he was continuing play and throwing the St. Johns player to the ground. Of course St. Johns probably didn't see it that way.

I also think the flagrant was a result of being frustrated and thinking the Seton Hall player was showing up their team with the attempt that the end. It's customary and good sportsmanship to not shoot the ball when you're up and the shot clock is off. There was no need for that last attempt but that does not excuse the foul.

BTW, I more than likely would have had a flagrant foul just for the action itself. I don't believe the St. Johns player stood over the player and stared him down. There was a good 3 feet between the player on the ground and the fouler.