Clips: Gonzaga v. BYU

[JRutledge]

11:01 in the second half there was a Flagrant 1 called that was talked about as a possible Flagrant 2.

I just wish the damn commentators would know that it was not a Flagrant Technical Foul. But that is asking waaaaayyyyyy too much.

Peace

[youngump]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

11:01 in the second half there was a Flagrant 1 called that was talked about as a possible Flagrant 2.

I just wish the damn commentators would know that it was not a Flagrant Technical Foul. But that is asking waaaaayyyyyy too much.

Peace

You should probably also get the delay of game whistle and no call at about 17:30 left in the second half. It'll generate more interesting discussion.

[Toren]

Originally Posted by youngump

You should probably also get the delay of game whistle and no call at about 17:30 left in the second half. It'll generate more interesting discussion.

I think John Adams confused the staff, they had issued Gonzaga a delay of game warning for crossing the boundary plane during inbound earlier in the game. Then they issue another "warning" for grabbing the ball out of the rim and throwing it to the ref.

I still believe that should have been a technical, but because of that point of discussion (emphasis) by Adams, I believe they thought they needed an official warning for that particular act (grabbing the ball out of the rim and throwing it to the ref).

My two cents.

Didn't mean to hijack the thread.

[APG]

Originally Posted by youngump

You should probably also get the delay of game whistle and no call at about 17:30 left in the second half. It'll generate more interesting discussion.

Originally Posted by Toren

I think John Adams confused the staff, they had issued Gonzaga a delay of game warning for crossing the boundary plane during inbound earlier in the game. Then they issue another "warning" for grabbing the ball out of the rim and throwing it to the ref.

I still believe that should have been a technical, but because of that point of discussion (emphasis) by Adams, I believe they thought they needed an official warning for that particular act (grabbing the ball out of the rim and throwing it to the ref).

Delay of Game Warning:

Originally Posted by JRutledge

11:01 in the second half there was a Flagrant 1 called that was talked about as a possible Flagrant 2.

I just wish the damn commentators would know that it was not a Flagrant Technical Foul. But that is asking waaaaayyyyyy too much.

Peace

Flagrant 1 Personal Foul:

Looks like a typical delay of game warning, what discussion would there be?

Not totally sure on the flagrant, but Flagrant 1 looks ok to me.

[Camron Rust]

Looks like the way to get a flagrant foul might be to find a defender in questionable position and run into his arm.

Sure, it is a foul and even a hard foul but 90% of the impact, even though the defender was the one that did foul, was still from the offensive player. The arm swing only came down after the offensive player ran into his triceps and the arm "swing" only came across the shooters arms, not his head.

Are we creating a new monster bigger than flopping? If a player gets the idea they can get 2 shots and the ball by running into an opponents arm, this could get silly.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Toren

I think John Adams confused the staff, they had issued Gonzaga a delay of game warning for crossing the boundary plane during inbound earlier in the game. Then they issue another "warning" for grabbing the ball out of the rim and throwing it to the ref.

I still believe that should have been a technical, but because of that point of discussion (emphasis) by Adams, I believe they thought they needed an official warning for that particular act (grabbing the ball out of the rim and throwing it to the ref).

My two cents.

Didn't mean to hijack the thread.

The last time that I looked up this particular rule there was a difference between NCAA and NFHS.
About four years ago the NFHS added a warning for water on the court following a TO or intermission and also changed its rule such that one warning was issued for any of the four delay situations and the next infraction resulted in a team technical foul. The NCAA rule remains that the team gets a warning for each specific kind of delay and one warning doesn't apply to the other situations. The team must indeed commit the same delay infraction a second time in order to earn a T.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Toren

I think John Adams confused the staff, they had issued Gonzaga a delay of game warning for crossing the boundary plane during inbound earlier in the game. Then they issue another "warning" for grabbing the ball out of the rim and throwing it to the ref.

I still believe that should have been a technical, but because of that point of discussion (emphasis) by Adams, I believe they thought they needed an official warning for that particular act (grabbing the ball out of the rim and throwing it to the ref).

My two cents.

Didn't mean to hijack the thread.

John Adams commented on this game tonight (Thursday) already?

Peace

[JRutledge]

So are you saying Camron that this should not be a Flagrant 1? Or are you saying that we should not call a foul? I guess I am confused by what you are suggesting should be called here.

Peace

[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.

[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.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

John Adams commented on this game tonight (Thursday) already?

Peace

He issued a bulletin about scoring teams grabbing the ball out of the net and throwing it to an official. It was a rather wordy bulletin that also incorrectly identified the type of penalty. He sent out a correction the same day.

[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.

[Toren]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The last time that I looked up this particular rule there was a difference between NCAA and NFHS.
About four years ago the NFHS added a warning for water on the court following a TO or intermission and also changed its rule such that one warning was issued for any of the four delay situations and the next infraction resulted in a team technical foul. The NCAA rule remains that the team gets a warning for each specific kind of delay and one warning doesn't apply to the other situations. The team must indeed commit the same delay infraction a second time in order to earn a T.

Thanks for the clarification.