Illinois State/Wichita video request

[twocentsworth]

Per the ESPN.com article posted above, it's clear the officials correctly called a FF1 foul against Il. St., but allowed an incorrect Wichita St. shooter to attempt the two FT's. It wasn't a technical foul; it wasn't a personal foul; it was a Flagrant Foul 1 (which is the same as an Intentional Foul in NFHS).

The crew made the mistake of putting the wrong shooter at the FT line. A big-time mistake by a big-time crew!

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by twocentsworth

Per the ESPN.com article posted above, it's clear the officials correctly called a FF1 foul against Il. St., but allowed an incorrect Wichita St. shooter to attempt the two FT's. It wasn't a technical foul; it wasn't a personal foul; it was a Flagrant Foul 1 (which is the same as an Intentional Foul in NFHS).

The crew made the mistake of putting the wrong shooter at the FT line. A big-time mistake by a big-time crew!

You may wish to consult your NCAA rules book as flagrant fouls can be either personal or technical, but MUST be of one of those two types of fouls.
BTW instead of Flagrant 1 Technical NCAAM have Class A technicals for noncontact situations or contact dead ball technical for when there is. NCAAM does have a Flagrant 2 Tech.

[bob jenkins]

The article I read (not on espn) had it correct. The relevant part is that the officials allwoed the wrong shooter and have (or will be) disciplined, but that the specific discipline is private.

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

You may wish to consult your NCAA rules book as flagrant fouls can be either personal or technical, but MUST be of one of those two types of fouls.
BTW instead of Flagrant 1 Technical NCAAM have Class A technicals for noncontact situations or contact dead ball technical for when there is. NCAAM does have a Flagrant 2 Tech.

You might want to consult your NCAA rule book. The play in question occurred while the ball was LIVE and involved CONTACT therefore, the foul cannot be a flagrant technical foul, nor a class A technical foul.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by johnny d

You might want to consult your NCAA rule book. The play in question occurred while the ball was LIVE and involved CONTACT therefore, the foul cannot be a flagrant technical foul, nor a class A technical foul.

I'm advocating that the correct call is a Flagrant 1 PERSONAL foul or a Flagrant 2 PERSONAL foul.

Now please go read my post again. Nowhere did I claim that the action was a technical foul. I merely told the other poster that flagrant fouls must be either personal or technical since he had stated that it was not a personal foul.

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I'm advocating that the correct call is a Flagrant 1 PERSONAL foul or a Flagrant 2 PERSONAL foul.

Now please go read my post again. Nowhere did I claim that the action was a technical foul. I merely told the other poster that flagrant fouls must be either personal or technical since he had stated that it was not a personal foul.

Fine, but mentioning two possibilities in your orginal post implies that they actually had a choice to make between personal or technical.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by johnny d

Fine, but mentioning two possibilities in your orginal post implies that they actually had a choice to make between personal or technical.

No it doesn't.

[bob jenkins]

Nevada was specifically responding to this statement by twocentsworth:

It wasn't a technical foul; it wasn't a personal foul; it was a Flagrant Foul 1

That statement is entirely incorrect. All fouls are either personal or technical; they may have one (or more) "adjectives" in front of them.