Pacers-Hawks

There was interesting foul situation during tonight's Pacers-Hawks game. From the Associated Press: "...D.J. Augustin, who had 10 points, drove to the basket and the officials spend eight minutes reviewing the play to determine that Horford committed a flagrant foul on the play and Augustin was called for a technical."



Essentially, DJ drove to the rim, elbowed his defender (offensive foul), and then got hammered by Horford. The end result was ATL shooting 1 technical free-throw, the Pacers shooting 2 for the shooting foul, and getting the ball. All in all, a very weird situation. Anyone have any idea why it was penalized this way?

[APG]

They didn't call D.J. for an offensive foul.

They called Hordford for the flagrant foul penalty one...as such, they went to replay. After review, they saw the elbow by D.J. Agustin and assessed a technical foul against him. As such, they shoot the T for the technical foul, then shoot the two free throws for the flagrant foul penalty one...and the Pacers retain possession of the ball and have a throw-in at the free throw line extended with a fresh 24.

Originally Posted by APG

They didn't call D.J. for an offensive foul.

They called Hordford for the flagrant foul penalty one...as such, they went to replay. After review, they saw the elbow by D.J. Agustin and assessed a technical foul against him. As such, they shoot the T for the technical foul, then shoot the two free throws for the flagrant foul penalty one...and the Pacers retain possession of the ball and have a throw-in at the free throw line extended with a fresh 24.

I meant "offensive" in the way that DJ fouled Horford, not meaning a charge or anything. I agree that DJ elbowed Horford, but the nut-shot looked inadvertent. I understand the video review, but how can they retroactively issue a technical for that contact? I understand reviewing video to determine F1/F2 calls, but to issue a different foul entirely? Is this just the NBA or can NCAA do this as well?

[APG]

Originally Posted by seanwestref

I meant "offensive" in the way that DJ fouled Horford, not meaning a charge or anything. I agree that DJ elbowed Horford, but the nut-shot looked inadvertent. I understand the video review, but how can they retroactively issue a technical for that contact? I understand reviewing video to determine F1/F2 calls, but to issue a different foul entirely? Is this just the NBA or can NCAA do this as well?

When you speak about NBA rulings, using offensive foul has very specific meaning under the rule set.

Under NBA rules, when reviewing a flagrant foul they may review any unsportsmanlike acts that occur immediately prior to and after the call.

Originally Posted by APG

When you speak about NBA rulings, using offensive foul has very specific meaning under the rule set.

So I can't use "offensive foul" to describe any foul by the offensive player/team? I can't use it in a general sense?

Random mechanics question not worthy of a new thread: in the NBA and some NCAA games I have noticed the new Trail (after a made FG) point to the middle of the court. Why do they do this? Are they signalling two (or three) points? Are they signalling the new direction?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by seanwestref

So I can't use "offensive foul" to describe any foul by the offensive player/team? I can't use it in a general sense?

The point he is trying to make is that rules language describes a specific foul in the NBA. Just like saying the term "offensive foul" in a NF or NCAA game has no meaning or clear definition. After all this is a referee site and proper language matters here.

Peace

[APG]

Originally Posted by seanwestref

So I can't use "offensive foul" to describe any foul by the offensive player/team? I can't use it in a general sense?

Random mechanics question not worthy of a new thread: in the NBA and some NCAA games I have noticed the new Trail (after a made FG) point to the middle of the court. Why do they do this? Are they signalling two (or three) points? Are they signalling the new direction?

Well sure you can...but if you do, the first thing I'm going to assume, in a thread asking for an NBA answer, is a foul committed by an offensive player, when there's team control and which is neither a punching/flagrant foul.

And at least in the NBA, you'll see that used as that's that official's particular mechanic for chopping time in...it's not needed unless the clock is stopped (say after a made shot inside of two minutes of the 4th quarter). Also, you'll see it used more in NCAA-M when after a close play and it's a kind of "play-on" signal.

[APG]

I reread your post...yes, you can call an offensive foul on any foul called on the offense that is neither a flagrant/punching/unsporting foul....I never said you couldn't.

My only point initially was that the call on the floor never included calling DJ Augustin for an offensive foul. You would have seen the lead come out and punch it (and pretty emphatically might I add).

Originally Posted by APG

My only point initially was that the call on the floor never included calling DJ Augustin for an offensive foul.

I agree. I did not understand that the refs could (after video review) retroactively call a foul they did not signal at the time.

When I saw the play in real time, it looked like a flagrant all the way, and looked as though Horford got accidentally hit in the pubic region. I did not think that a tech was warranted for the elbow, but I realize now that they can penalize that.