Flop on a PC foul (Video Added)
 

Syracuse/Duke 1:42 to go in 2nd half, Parker's 5th foul - the defender threw his head back like he got hit with a bat in the forehead.
It seems to me that if one is hit in the front of the torso, the head almost always comes forward, rather than going to the rear.

Just because they oversell it doesn't mean it is not a foul. On the replay i thought it was a good call from lead.

Hopefully, one of our colleagues with video skills can post it, so we can discuss it. There was a similar "embellishment" later by a Duke player.

Overselling and flopping are not the same thing. One is still a foul, and one isn't.

A player can oversell himself right out of a call, though. It happens.

Huh? If there's a problem with the overselling, then let the player and/or coach know. But if there was a foul, how can you not call it? At least if you KNOW there was a foul.

I think what Rich is saying is that sometimes a player sells it to the point where it becomes questionable about whether there was a foul. In that case, I tend to go with a no-call.

"flopping" isn't in the book.

Gotcha. For some reason I read it as if he would penalize the player for overselling by NOT making the call.

Read Adam's post.

If you have to oversell what is a foul, when the contact is minimal, the official might just not call the foul.

I had a situation yesterday where a player was shooting a 3 point shot and kicked out his leg and acted like he was killed. Well his actions made me pass on the foul. Fortunately for him, my partner decide this was a foul. But without seeing the tape, I still think there was minimal contact. Often that overselling makes us think they flopped or were not fouled. That is why they can "oversell" themselves right out of a call.

Peace

Seeing as how "flopping" is merely acting like you got fouled, then there's no need for it to be in the book.

I was pointing out that the title of this thread is misleading. Or, in lawyer-speak, I suppose you could say the title of this thread is leading.

The reason I said that is because the rule is that "faking being fouled" is a technical foul. Players often start to bail in anticipation of contact. It looks like a flop, but they're not faking being fouled. Players also can fake being fouled without flopping (the shooter who screams as if he was hit while he's airborne).

We all know what's meant by a flop, I get that, but I wanted to discern between two different acts that can look similar.

Embellishing contact that doesn't put someone at a disadvantage is also "faking being fouled" and it's rarely talked about in that context.

I titled the thread as such to lead us into a discussion.;)

I was thinking the same thing, but I think there's a significant difference. Most players think that being touched = being fouled, but they have to "sell" that foul to get us to call it. IOW, they aren't faking something they think didn't happen, they're trying to show us something that did happen.

Normally, we consider it "faking" when there's no contact at all.

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="//www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/LPpNEGZol18" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Hmmm after seeing APGs video, I'm almost inclined to go with this ^.

Yup.

The L was so wide I don't think he had the best look possible at this.

APG, thanks for getting the video up. I still can't see anything worthy of a PC foul. Parker's arm found the defender's arm, and then the defender threw his arms up and his head back. To me, it doesn't add up to a PC foul.

Travel :)

Then no call. But I can see why the Lead called the PC...from his angle, looks like offensive player lead with elbow.

I saw the play earlier and was okay with the call, but watching the whole thing from different angles and with slow motion, a no call would have been okay with me, but then you'd have to call the travel, and I'm the only one that would do that.

I would have went with a travel.

I must agree with BNR & jar.

PS (BNR) - Are you back to work yet? Next visit to the RVA = ??

The guys doing these games are all excellent officials. Maybe some of the college guys can comment on this better. It seems like officials are choosing to pass on this call more often than them just missing it.

1. Players athletic ability is such that it is hard to be 100% sure it was a travel.

2. Officiating this level of play it is more acceptable to miss a travel, than a foul.

1. It was a travel, IMO, even before the contact.

2. I would say that is accurate.