Uncalled Cheap Shots

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by fiasco

Not to mention the fact that most officials here are in agreement that only one of the fouls in question should have been called flagrant, and that foul wasn't even committed by #34. It was #42.

No, most officials here would call each foul as you imply if they were isolated incidents....that is how I analyzed each one for the purposes of discussion.

But, in a game, I think most would have had an intentional on one of the earlier ones and then a flagrant on the following one when considered together....when it was clear that #34 had no intention of playing basketball.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Players get injuries all the time in games regardless of whether we call a foul or not. A player can be injured irregardless of whether we call a foul or not. I think we overplay the importance of litigation in these discussions.

I think that the point people are making is about fouls that come *after* a player should have been thrown out of the game —*not just a single play.

If there was a flagrant foul (or several) in a game by a single player and the referees allowed the player to stay in the game, a case could be made for negligence by the officials.

A couple of intentional fouls might have changed the tone of the game a bit (force the coach to talk to his punk-a$$ player and tell him to back off) ... and play #5 was flagrant by any definition. It's a travesty that 34 was allowed to stay in the game after that one.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by fiasco

And that's not even close to grounds to win a civil lawsuit.

It costs a LOT of money to defend yourself in a civil suit, even if the plaintiff loses!

[Brad]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

it was clear that #34 had no intention of playing basketball.

Bingo. And if you are not going to play basketball, please take a seat over there on the bench!!

Three fouls in the first half and the kid is sitting down for the rest of the half. Two more and he is gone from the game.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Brad

I think that the point people are making is about fouls that come *after* a player should have been thrown out of the game —*not just a single play.

If there was a flagrant foul (or several) in a game by a single player and the referees allowed the player to stay in the game, a case could be made for negligence by the officials.

A couple of intentional fouls might have changed the tone of the game a bit (force the coach to talk to his punk-a$$ player and tell him to back off) ... and play #5 was flagrant by any definition. It's a travesty that 34 was allowed to stay in the game after that one.

Well I think that would be adding stuff that we have no information on. I doubt a flagrant foul was even called. Now whether is should be is another issue, but I doubt a court is going to decide that based on this tape.

Peace

[Brad]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Well I think that would be adding stuff that we have no information on. I doubt a flagrant foul was even called. Now whether is should be is another issue, but I doubt a court is going to decide that based on this tape.

I was talking about liability as an official in general — not this specific game / video clip.

[mplagrow]

Originally Posted by chseagle

Yes that was really Connell High, I've never seen them get that physical.

#34 was one of our primary defensive players for football, & watching that video he still thinks it's football.

Of course, not everything is being shown, perhaps some Highland players were playing the same way.

If you saw the video, it was amazing that they weren't responding to the violence. And even if they did play the same way, that doesn't justify anything. Ref needs to deal with that too.

[JugglingReferee]

The Cheap Shots Video went viral. It's on the front page of Yahoo! right now!


It's been up 7 hours with 18,000+ comments. lmao

It's different world that we live in than even 5 years ago...

[Rich]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

The Cheap Shots Video went viral. It's on the front page of Yahoo! right now!


It's been up 7 hours with 18,000+ comments. lmao

It's different world that we live in than even 5 years ago...

Front and center on Deadspin, too.

[RookieDude]

....I can barely wait for Friday night...

just like any other game...yahoo!

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by RookieDude

....I can barely wait for Friday night...

just like any other game...yahoo!

I can't wait to hear about the atmosphere!

I hoe your game goes viral too......for the right reasons. Good luck. Make us proud!

[Tim C]

SI.com

Hot Clicks

"The Dirtiest High School Basketball team in America"

t

[rwest]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I only saw one flagrant foul as well and a couple that would have been intentional at best. The last play would have been nothing more than just a foul. Now that being said, you have to have game awareness. This kid is really not trying to play basketball. I would look to call any little contact with him a foul and get him out of the game if I did not get him for a flagrant earlier. The officials acted totally oblivious to what was going on in this game. I am amazed by their total lack of awareness.

Peace

Only really one flagrant which was the close line on #5. The Oakland Raiders of the 70's would have been proud. The push in the back was definitely intentional. Foul #3, the kid tried to hold up and I wouldn't have called it flagrant, although he did hit him in the head. However, he appeared to be attempting to block the shot but not very well.

[dave30]

Aaaahhhh.....just kids being kids!!!

They will all probably end up being best friends in college!

[ga314ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

From the article on the Yakima website reporting on the situation:



NEVER comment to a news source on the officiating in a game, especially one which you did not work yourself!!!

...is an "official referee". That's got to give him some special rights.