Clips: Gonzaga v. BYU

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

I watched it live - the joys of working in the middle of the night - and I wasn't convinced it was an F1 when I first saw it. I'm still not entirely convinced. It seems like the BYU kid was penalized for being a big, strong kid more than anything else.

BYU's kid probably has some history based on his taunting after the play. If he got a FF1 on that play I'm not losing any sleep over it.

[bob jenkins]

Not worthy of a warning.

Not worthy of a FF1 (shooting foul only)

Both based just on the clip and not on anything else that might have transpired in the game.

[Toren]

Seeing it live, I wasn't convinced the foul itself warranted a FF1, but I think what convinced the crew was the taunting type actions after the foul.

So instead of going Common Foul, shooting 2 free throws, plus a technical for taunting (not necessarily administered in that order). They just upgraded the foul to a FF1. I didn't mind it at all.

[Tio]

IMO - this is an obvious F1. First, Kaufisi is a football player. Second, after the hard foul, him standing over Olynyk and clearly saying something (probably not in the spirit of sportsmanship) would seal the deal.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Tio

IMO - this is an obvious F1. First, Kaufisi is a football player. Second, after the hard foul, him standing over Olynyk and clearly saying something (probably not in the spirit of sportsmanship) would seal the deal.

Then it should be a foul, then a T. But not upgrade a common foul to a FF1 because of a dead ball action that would be a T.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by Tio

First, Kaufisi is a football player. Second, after the hard foul, him standing over Olynyk and clearly saying something (probably not in the spirit of sportsmanship) would seal the deal.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Then it should be a foul, then a T. But not upgrade a common foul to a FF1 because of a dead ball action that would be a T.

I agree with Camron. There's nothing within the rule to let you upgrade to a flagrant because of what he did once the ball is dead. Obviously we don't officiate games in a vacuum but if you're calling the F1 then call it, either before the review - as they did here - or after. If he taunts him then get that too.

As for the football player aspect...I'm with the others who say "so?" He's not the only 6'7", 260+ basketball player around these days.

Originally Posted by canuckrefguy

While the post-contact taunting is not grounds technically for a FF, it is certainly common-sense evidence that the defender's actions were not routine.

We see taunting after perfectly legal shot-block attempts. Does that mean the actions of those defenders weren't routine? Again, if he taunted him call the Class A technical. IMO if you do that you control the situation that much better since it counts towards his five for DQ, meaning he's another step closer to being out of the game.

[agr8zebra]

So we are saying a team would have to get for a warning for: A) Huddling in the key, B)reaching through the plane and C)interfering with the ball after a made basket. Then if they committed the same type of act, A, B or C they would then be assessed a technical? Thus we would be issuing 3 separate warnings.

I only do HS, under NFHS, which I feel one warning would suffice for all 3 acts and a subsequent occurrence would result in a T Foul. Right?


FYI... the BYU player penalized was a member of the BYU football team last fall. Plays Defensive End and he should be a good one, maybe even play on Sunday. He is aggressive. I did him in HS basketball his So and Jr years, he didn't play BB his senior as he tore an ACL in Football, so this year is his first basketball in about 4 years as he did the Mormon mission thing for 2 years. He has a decision to make as BYU starts Spring Drills on Monday. Football or Basketball???

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by Tio

IMO - this is an obvious F1. First, Kaufisi is a football player. Second, after the hard foul, him standing over Olynyk and clearly saying something (probably not in the spirit of sportsmanship) would seal the deal.

So?

I don't think this warranted a FF1.

The DOG warning I can live with, but I'm not sure it really was.

[Tio]

Originally Posted by zm1283

So?

I don't think this warranted a FF1.

The DOG warning I can live with, but I'm not sure it really was.

If you aren't aware when bench players come into the game to muck it up and "rough-up" the other team's star players, your games will not go well.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Tio

If you aren't aware when bench players come into the game to muck it up and "rough-up" the other team's star players, your games will not go well.

Exactly. I always discuss problem children in my pre-games.

[JRutledge]

I think this is clearly and FF1 when the player runs his mouth afterwards. If he was just fouling the player and that was all, then he would have walked away. And this guy he knocked down is listed as 7'0" tall. And that player is not soft at all either.

Peace

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by agr8zebra

So we are saying a team would have to get for a warning for: A) Huddling in the key, B)reaching through the plane and C)interfering with the ball after a made basket. Then if they committed the same type of act, A, B or C they would then be assessed a technical? Thus we would be issuing 3 separate warnings.

I only do HS, under NFHS, which I feel one warning would suffice for all 3 acts and a subsequent occurrence would result in a T Foul. Right?


FYI... the BYU player penalized was a member of the BYU football team last fall. Plays Defensive End and he should be a good one, maybe even play on Sunday. He is aggressive. I did him in HS basketball his So and Jr years, he didn't play BB his senior as he tore an ACL in Football, so this year is his first basketball in about 4 years as he did the Mormon mission thing for 2 years. He has a decision to make as BYU starts Spring Drills on Monday. Football or Basketball???

FED: One warning for any of the acts, then any of the acts is a T. So, one warning maximum.

NCAA: One warning for each of the acts, then that same act again is a T. So, four (or 5) warnings are possible.

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Not worthy of a warning.

Not worthy of a FF1 (shooting foul only)

Both based just on the clip and not on anything else that might have transpired in the game.

Agreed