NCAA Flagrant Foul

[chseagle]

Watching BYU vs. Buffalo on BYUtv, Buffalo player was just outside RA when a BYU player tries going past him from behind. The Buffalo player's elbow ended up making contact with the BYU player's chest, causing displacement.

The ruling after a monitor review was that the Buffalo player was charged with what the announcers called a Flagrant 1 Foul. The Buffalo player was not ejected.

BYU shot 2 free throws & the ball was inbounded tableside.

Why in the NCAA is there a Flagrant 1 Foul (no ejection) & a Flagrant 2 Foul (ejection)?

[kgeorge0263]

In college basketball they re-named the intentional foul a flagrant 1. So same penalty as former intentional foul, just re-named.

Rules panel approves restricted-area arc for Division I - NCAA.org

[APG]

Originally Posted by chseagle

Why in the NCAA is there a Flagrant 1 Foul (no ejection) & a Flagrant 2 Foul (ejection)?

The clear up the misconception that an intentional foul required intent...plus it's language that is similar to the NBA thus making it easier for fans.

[chseagle]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

The clear up the misconception that an intentional foul required intent...plus it's language that is similar to the NBA thus making it easier for fans.

Why make things easier on the laymen fans when they seem to not care about the rules?

[APG]

Originally Posted by chseagle

Why make things easier on the laymen fans when they seem to not care about the rules?

It also makes it easier for players and coaches. No need to explain to the coach that an intentional foul doesn't have to involve intent....just tell him you have a FF1 for a high elbow.

[chseagle]

Originally Posted by chseagle

Why make things easier on the laymen fans when they seem to not care about the rules?

The above of course was a joke

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

It also makes it easier for players and coaches. No need to explain to the coach that an intentional foul doesn't have to involve intent....just tell him you have a FF1 for a high elbow.

A very logical explanation, however how many players actually study the rule book? How many coaches?

That's what the officials ruled after doing the monitor review.

The way the announcers stated it, was as if they were talking to a community of Ph.Ds in Basketballology. You would think they would have explained it in simpler terms for the average sports fan.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by chseagle

The above of course was a joke



A very logical explanation, however how many players actually study the rule book? How many coaches?

That's what the officials ruled after doing the monitor review.

The way the announcers stated it, was as if they were talking to a community of Ph.Ds in Basketballology. You would think they would have explained it in simpler terms for the average sports fan.

They do not have to study the rules. All they know is what they see on TV and think it applies to their level when it clearly does not. That is why you have people wanting BI for slapping the backboard even though the rules that never applies but in the NBA.

Peace

[APG]

Originally Posted by chseagle

The above of course was a joke



A very logical explanation, however how many players actually study the rule book? How many coaches?

That's what the officials ruled after doing the monitor review.

The way the announcers stated it, was as if they were talking to a community of Ph.Ds in Basketballology. You would think they would have explained it in simpler terms for the average sports fan.

Which is why the change in nomenclature...if fans, players, and coaches studied the rules like we did, then they'd know that intentional fouls don't necessarily involve intent. But of course they don't and why the NCAA felt the name change was needed.

Quite frankly, I wouldn't mind the name change at the NFHS level because I've seen too many officials somehow misconstrue that all intentional fouls involve intent.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Which is why the change in nomenclature...if fans, players, and coaches studied the rules like we did, then they'd know that intentional fouls don't necessarily involve intent. But of course they don't and why the NCAA felt the name change was needed.

Quite frankly, I wouldn't mind the name change at the NFHS level because I've seen too many officials somehow misconstrue that all intentional fouls involve intent.

I have always advocated for the language to change. I am glad it did at the college level. Something tells me it will be some time or never for the NF to change the wording. Then again anything is possible.

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by chseagle

The above of course was a joke



A very logical explanation, however how many players actually study the rule book? How many coaches?

That's what the officials ruled after doing the monitor review.

The way the announcers stated it, was as if they were talking to a community of Ph.Ds in Basketballology. You would think they would have explained it in simpler terms for the average sports fan.

Many teams receive brief rules clinics from NCAA officials in conjunction with preseason scrimmages.