The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:06pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Missouri
Posts: 671
For some context, UCLA had 2 fouls with like 10 seconds to go. They intentionally fouled 3 times in about 4 seconds. This was their 4th foul in 5 seconds and their 6th team foul. So the fact that they were strategically intentionally fouling made this one look much worse. The ballhandler had a clear path to the basket on a last second type play and was grabbed by the waist by a defender that was out of position, this looks like an intentional (flagrant 1) to me. The ballhandler definitely embellished a bit, but I don't see how that makes any difference in this being a flagrant 1 or not.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Sun Dec 30, 2012, 05:15pm
We don't rent pigs
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by ballgame99 View Post
for some context, ucla had 2 fouls with like 10 seconds to go. They intentionally fouled 3 times in about 4 seconds. This was their 4th foul in 5 seconds and their 6th team foul. So the fact that they were strategically intentionally fouling made this one look much worse. The ballhandler had a clear path to the basket on a last second type play and was grabbed by the waist by a defender that was out of position, this looks like an intentional (flagrant 1) to me. The ballhandler definitely embellished a bit, but i don't see how that makes any difference in this being a flagrant 1 or not.
+1
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum.
It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow.


Lonesome Dove
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Sun Dec 30, 2012, 07:45pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by ballgame99 View Post
The ballhandler had a clear path to the basket on a last second type play and was grabbed by the waist by a defender that was out of position, this looks like an intentional (flagrant 1) to me. The ballhandler definitely embellished a bit, but I don't see how that makes any difference in this being a flagrant 1 or not.
Clear path? Really? There were two more defenders between the point of the foul and the basket that could have easily cut him off and he only got by the 3rd defender as the foul was occurring.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 31, 2012, 02:12pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Missouri
Posts: 671
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
Clear path? Really? There were two more defenders between the point of the foul and the basket that could have easily cut him off and he only got by the 3rd defender as the foul was occurring.
Clear path may be overstating it, let's just say A1 was in an advantageous position (3 on 2) and was grabbed by the waist by an out of position defender.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Mon Dec 31, 2012, 04:44pm
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by ballgame99 View Post
Clear path may be overstating it, let's just say A1 was in an advantageous position (3 on 2) and was grabbed by the waist by an out of position defender.
What difference does that make? That is not the reason we call a F1 or not at the NCAA level. It is called because they are either not playing the ball or they cause some level of excessive contact. I would call this the same no matter what advantage they had on the break. I just think the player was trying to sell the call rather than really get fouled that hard.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 02, 2013, 04:33pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: depends on your perspective
Posts: 697
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge View Post
What difference does that make? That is not the reason we call a F1 or not at the NCAA level. It is called because they are either not playing the ball or they cause some level of excessive contact. I would call this the same no matter what advantage they had on the break. I just think the player was trying to sell the call rather than really get fouled that hard.

Peace
LOL...I'm just going to agree to disagree on this one, Rut.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 02, 2013, 04:49pm
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLH17 View Post
LOL...I'm just going to agree to disagree on this one, Rut.
That is fine, but I think a guy that flys around like that looked like something in a video game with a first person shooter. It did not look like to me that was call caused because of contact and contact alone.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 02, 2013, 05:13pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: depends on your perspective
Posts: 697
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge View Post
That is fine, but I think a guy that flys around like that looked like something in a video game with a first person shooter. It did not look like to me that was call caused because of contact and contact alone.

Peace
Whaaaa?????!!!!!! lol...

Aside from Pressey flinging his arms out (mainly due to him trying to maintain any kind of balance), there was nothing embellished on that play.

The dude is tiny and moves quicker than the speed of light.

A bigger player grabbed him by the jeresey at his waist and pulled while Pressey was trying to slide by.

Physics. Helicopter. Blackhawk Down.

Ok...I'm just arguing for the sake of fun now. It is what it was. This "fanboy" has moved on. lol.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fla-UCLA softball_junky Softball 17 Thu Jun 05, 2008 10:24am
Ucla - Asu IRISHMAFIA Softball 8 Sat May 31, 2008 10:09am
UCLA Texas & UCLA NW tcblue13 Softball 3 Mon Jun 05, 2006 04:53pm
Missouri fonzzy07 Basketball 14 Sat Feb 04, 2006 12:01am
UCLA vs AZ wadeintothem Softball 2 Sat May 07, 2005 12:57pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:20am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1