Uncalled Cheap Shots

[Jesse James]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I agree, it seems to me that #34 exemplifies a failure of coaching. Unless #34's dog had died, this is behavior that would have shown up sooner; either in practice or previous games.

I also agree that if red had behaved similarly in this game, they would have likely broken into a brawl.

Judging by the six plays we saw, I'm assuming white got their a$$es handed to them on the score board. That might explain (not justify) the officials not handing out intentional fouls like candy.

White won the game, 38-37.

[bainsey]

Since we covered the misuse of "flagrant" here, does anyone want to breakdown the definitions of "flagrant" in the NCAA, NBA, and FIBA rule sets?

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Since we covered the misuse of "flagrant" here, does anyone want to breakdown the definitions of "flagrant" in the NCAA, NBA, and FIBA rule sets?

Fighting. Although I'm not sure about that in the NBE.

[VaTerp]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

Fighting. Although I'm not sure about that in the NBE.

Flagrant fouls cover much more than fighting in NBA and they have Flagrant 1 and 2 categories based on the severity of the act. Flagrant 2 is an automatic ejection.

NCAA just went to a similar format, this year I believe.

I do not know FIBA's classifications. I'm sure someone else can give a more educated response on all of the above.

[de la hoops]

Situation #2: "Red, you're OOB ... White ball!"
Maybe quick enough to prevent the imminent foul????

[Adam]

Originally Posted by de la hoops

Situation #2: "Red, you're OOB ... White ball!"
Maybe quick enough to prevent the imminent foul????

Except that he wasn't.

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by de la hoops

Situation #2: "Red, you're OOB ... White ball!"
Maybe quick enough to prevent the imminent foul????

Good thinking.................#5, I'm going to call traveling so he won't get hammered.

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by de la hoops

Situation #2: "Red, you're OOB ... White ball!"
Maybe quick enough to prevent the imminent foul????

Originally Posted by fullor30

Good thinking.................#5, I'm going to call traveling so he won't get hammered.

I consider this taking the path of least resistance and in this case the wrong path all together. Some could say this one play alone may allow you to do as you say - I do not agree with that. Contact like this is not incidental IMO.

Considering everything else, this absolutely not incidental or something that would be ignored in favor of traveling.

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by tomegun

I consider this taking the path of least resistance and in this case the wrong path all together. Some could say this one play alone may allow you to do as you say - I do not agree with that. Contact like this is not incidental IMO.

Considering everything else, this absolutely not incidental or something that would be ignored in favor of traveling.

You do realize I was being sarcastic??????

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

Fighting. Although I'm not sure about that in the NBE.

The NCAA has changed their definitions. Intentional fouls are now called flagrant fouls (flagrant 1, I believe) just like the NBA (IIRC).

The kid who put this video together is not, however, confusing the terms. As rocky said, he's just got the rule wrong (and so does this anonymous official quoted in the article).

And fighting isn't required in high school for a flagrant. "Violent or savage" is another standard.

[APG]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Since we covered the misuse of "flagrant" here, does anyone want to breakdown the definitions of "flagrant" in the NCAA, NBA, and FIBA rule sets?

NBA:
Flagrant foul penalty 1: A foul that involves contact that is unnecessary. If a player commits two FF1 fouls in a game, he's automatically ejected.

Flagrant foul penalty 2: A foul that involves contact that is unnecessary and excessive. It is an unsportsmanlike act and a player is automatically ejected upon confirmation from replay (FF2 is an automatic replay trigger).

NCAA:
They use similar language compared to NFHS, except intentional fouls are now known as flagrant foul 1 and flagrant fouls are now known as flagrant foul 2.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bainsey

We covered the misuse of "flagrant" here.

How about the use, misuse, or abuse, of the term, "hard foul"? Where Forum posters have used the term, "hard foul" are they specifically referring to one variety of an intentional foul?

4-19-3: An intentional foul is a personal or technical foul that may or may
not be premeditated and is not based solely on the severity of the act. Intentional
fouls include, but are not limited to:
a. Contact that neutralizes an opponent's obvious advantageous position.
b. Contact away from the ball with an opponent who is clearly not involved
with a play.
c. Contact that is not a legitimate attempt to play the ball/player specifically
designed to stop the clock or keep it from starting.
d. Excessive contact with an opponent while playing the ball.
e. Contact with a thrower-in as in 9-2-10 Penalty 4.



Here in my little corner of Connecticut, we've been taught to vocalize, "hard foul", when we give the intentional foul, excessive contact signal, a signal that I realize is not an approved NFHS, or IAABO, signal, but it has been approved for use in high school games in my local area, if not all of Connecticut.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

How about the use, misuse, or abuse, of the term, "hard foul"? Where Forum posters have used the term, "hard foul" are they specifically referring to one variety of an intentional foul?

4-19-3: An intentional foul is a personal or technical foul that may or may
not be premeditated and is not based solely on the severity of the act. Intentional
fouls include, but are not limited to:
a. Contact that neutralizes an opponent's obvious advantageous position.
b. Contact away from the ball with an opponent who is clearly not involved
with a play.
c. Contact that is not a legitimate attempt to play the ball/player specifically
designed to stop the clock or keep it from starting.
d. Excessive contact with an opponent while playing the ball.
e. Contact with a thrower-in as in 9-2-10 Penalty 4.



Here in my little corner of Connecticut, we've been taught to vocalize, "hard foul", when we give the intentional foul, excessive contact signal, a signal that I realize is not an approved NFHS, or IAABO, signal, but it has been approved for use in high school games in my local area, if not all of Connecticut.

Looks like my six year old when he's trying not to push his sister.

[APG]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

How about the use, misuse, or abuse, of the term, "hard foul"? Where Forum posters have used the term, "hard foul" are they specifically referring to one variety of an intentional foul?

How can one misuse a term that isn't defined in the rule book? Just because there's a hard foul doesn't necessarily mean there's been excessive contact.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

How can one misuse a term that isn't defined in the rule book? Just because there's a hard foul doesn't necessarily mean there's been excessive contact.

Except in one particular corner....