Fastbreak Foul (Video)
 

<iframe width="853" height="480" src="//www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/e1eSYPeF_iM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Upgrading nor not? INT/FF1 or Flagrant/FF2?

Appears to be a Fed game... I'm going with INT.

Looks like both L and C had it.

Intentional or Flagrant 1 all the way at the very least. Game situation could dictate if I feel it is a FF2 or Flagrant foul or not.

Peace

I'm going flagrant foul/FF2 on this.

You beat me to it. I saw before the edit. :D

Peace

FF2 - go away now, kid.

Flagrant / FF2.

Flagrant...FF2 in NCAA. Bye-bye...

Initial contact was a hit to the shooters face/head. No way we can just go INT on that kind of play.

Eject, Eject, Eject. This is a no brainer for me. You leave this kid in and you are asking for retaliation. Even if the video makes it look worse than it was the violent nature of his action, and intent would do it for me. Does anyone know what if they went with intentional or upgraded to flagrant?

No less than Int/FF1...possibly more depending on factors leading up to that.

I'm in this camp. Can't clearly see that arm coming down on the head or neck. If I could, I'd probably go with FLAG/FF2.

Agree. Can't speak to the college FF1/2, but in a Fed game, I don't see enough to warrent a flagrant/ejection unless there was something prior that would suggest an intent. It looks like a big guy hustling back and attempting to play the ball. Easy Intentional though given the amount of contact.

You could have retaliation anyway. That should not be just our decision making process. And that is why I would like to know what kind of game we have had up until that point. It might be a flagrant, but I am not seeing anything alone that suggest the player was not trying to play the ball or make a basketball play. It was not great, but sometimes players make bad plays, does not mean it is savage in nature that requires an ejection. Then again I would not be mad at someone for an ejection, it just would not be my first choice based only on what I witnessed here.

Peace

:)A fair assessment. I would not make the decison on that. My brain isn't that sharpe;). If something like that does happen after a foul of that sort you can sometimes put a place holder on a play like that.

Double Preliminary Signal ???
 

In my high school game, intentional (hard) foul.

It's convenient that both the lead, and the center, had to same call. I would hate to think what would happen if they had different calls, with one being the old "heave ho" unofficial signal. As you are all aware, in the Land That Time Forgot, also known as Connecticut, almost all of our games are two person games, so whose call is this?

Good question ... but in my opinion if both call this, and one gives the ejection signal, you eject - if EITHER official sees enough to make that call, go with it.

Been There, Done That ...
 

Seems fine, but let's say the center goes with an ordinary in the act of shooting foul, and give a holding preliminary signal, while the lead gives the intentional (hard) foul preliminary signal?

Let's just say that I'm not a big fan of preliminary signals on double whistles, while still realizing that sometimes one official doesn't hear the other's whistle, doesn't realize it's a double whistle, and gives a strong "sell it" preliminary signal. I hate it when that happens. Luckily, the few times that I've been involved in such a situation, my partner, and I, have both had the same signal, there but for the grace of God ...

Does #34 dark jersey have tights on?

I'd like to see the lead close into the players once the illegal hit is delivered. Just being more of a presence on the play.

I'm seeing flagrant/flagrant 2.

Why? One is no more likely to be correct than the other.

Minimum of INT in Fed and UNS in FIBA - clear path rule. Quite likely upgraded to a DQ.

And if I'm the new L on this play, I want to know why the new T has a call on a breakaway that is my primary.

Intentional and if I'm the calling official - the L - I immediately go over to the T and ask him his thoughts on giving B1 a flagrant. The fact I'm asking means I'm leaning towards a flagrant.

C??

Edit: Damn JetMet and his edit! :P

:p

Player's Answer ...
 

... "Long socks."

Do you want to pat him down to check?

Did he have a call, or was it a supporting whistle?

Agreed.

0.11 sec lead has foul, and the trail isn't in frame
0.12 sec lead is starting the preliminary signal for Int F
0.13 sec T has made it in frame to table side/3pt line, and is mirroring the preliminary signal for Int F. T freezes and observes players. L comes in and is observing players in lane.

We can debate whether it was int or flag all day, but I think they handled the situation appropriately. I don't have an issue with the double whistle, or the T coming in and mirroring the L call. Unless the T was doing something out of frame we are not privy to this is a good crew call.