FT flopping, then Flagrant Foul.
 

FT flooping?

Did anyone see this play?

It was funny but how would you handle this?

Oh, feel free to embed this if possible. I cannot seem to do it on my IPad.

Peace

I believe the ended up giving the player who did the pushing a FF1. I agree with that. I would have liked the C to be a little more active there either telling him to knock it off or giving information about what he saw immediately. A little acting but that is not anything close to a basketball play.

I'd only agree with that if they'd give the flopper a T, making it a double foul.

T the B player. That will stop all the nonsense that goes on. Then tell the A coach that acting isn't appreciated.

Wouldn't you have a FF1 then a technical foul?

There is a difference between flopping and exaggeration. This is exaggeration by the white jersey player. If the black jersey player does not want to be called for a flagrant foul then he should not be sticking his hand there.

It's been stated here before but I don't recall. What determines what they can and can't review? I have a lane violation, before and after the review.

Ball was live, couldn't have a T for that.

If the offensive player had not exaggerated, the defensive player would have gotten away with foul. The exaggeration is what led to the video review.

But the offensive player most definitely got fouled, so he wasn't faking..

With this mentality, you're only encouraging exaggeration/flopping.

Let's say A-1 stealthily gives B-2 at shot in the groin, and B-2 loudly cries out, "Aaah! Motherf***er!!!" The loud profanity brings attention to the egregious act, which you may not have noticed without it, but it still doesn't justify the reaction.

One illegal act does not allow permission for another. And yes, he most certainly was faking. If you go down strictly from the opponent's contact, that's fine. If the intent is to make the contact seem worse than it really is, that's faking.

Faking being fouled means he didn't get fouled. Since they called a FF1 upon review, by definition he was not faking.

That's not exclusively the rule. Don't forget, it's prefaced with those key words, "is not limited to."

What the B player did was not a basketball play. It was BS. The right outcome prevailed, IMO.

I'm more interested in the defender committing an intentional, non-basketball play than I am in whether target embellished the contact. Big picture vs. small picture.

This is where our pictures differ. I believe flopping/embellishing to be a problem that needs to be addressed, period.

Didn't mean to gloss over this, Sharp. Good question. Can you even double up a flagrant/intentional foul with a technical (in any rule set)?

I don't know about you, but getting hit in the groin justifies that response from me.


And faking does not equal embellishment. The T is for faking being foul...as in you acted as if you were fouled when there was no foul to be had. If there's a foul to be had on the play, even with some embellishment, you can't fake being fouled cause you've ruled that he's been fouled. To try and even up the score in your mind by calling a T on the fouled player is a pioneer call (and some would say not even support by rule)...especially when it's ruled that the player was FLAGRANTLY (or in NFHS, INTENTIONALLY) fouled!

It's not a problem anywhere I officiate, nor is embellishing something addressed in any rule set I work. You can only embellish something that already exists by fact.

What's a problem is players finding new ways to gain an advantage by committing sneaky fouls, and no officials being aware of it.

What's troublesome to me is officials being more concern with one player's exaggerated reaction as opposed another player's illegal original action.

Yes, of course. In Fed, INT. In college, the right outcome occurred.

Flopping is faking being fouled. How is exaggeration not within that definition?

It is. Some just wan't to avoid the issue any way they can. If the defender does anything in an attempt to get you to believe there was a foul other than actually being fouled, they have faked a foul.

Wouldn't go that far. A player can be legitimately fouled and still embellish the contact. To me, that doesn't meet the letter or the spirit of the rule.

All flopping is exaggeration. Not all exaggeration is flopping.

I don't think I'm trying to "avoid the issue any way I can".

Regarding the play in the OP: Was there a foul? Yes. Did the defender exaggerate and act like he was shot, which made it look like he was flopping? Yes. Does the defender deserve a technical foul for this? No.

Correct, because is was live-ball contact, so he received a flagrant personal (FF1). ;)

How many T's have you called for this in your career?

I will answer for myself, zero. And I have never heard a single person ever give a T for this at any level.

Peace

Answering for me: 1
YMCA ball. Kid fell back like he was shot when the dribbler got to about the closely guarded point: and I had already warned him.

Never in a school game, though. I have warned a kid once, after a blatant no-call (he bailed before contact) failed to solve the problem.

I'm with Camron on the debate. If a kid is not fouled, but embellishes even actual contact to make us think he was, that fits the definition.

I give a little more ground, though, in that I believe most players think they were fouled when they do this, but want to do "more" to get us to notice. I don't consider this as fitting the rule.

Also like Camron (clear from previous discussions), I'm not going to be a pioneer just because I think something fits the rule definition. There's nothing to be gained there for a problem I see occur very seldomly.

This is where I'm not with Camron:

Who are the "some" he is disparaging? Because unless he is making this call 2-3 times a year, including those 3-point shooters who fall to the ground trying to draw a foul, then what makes all the other officials "cowards who are avoiding the issue", but he "just doesn't want to be a pioneer".

And I've say it before, and will say it again, there are more players who flop while shooting 3-point shots than any other type of floppers, yet no one ever comes in here telling us how they are cleaing up the problem with jumpshooters who fake being fouled.

I did. Once. Kid flew back onto the floor and the player driving didn't come within 2 feet of him. I had warned him earlier and relayed that warning to the coach, too.

Quite a few high level guys I know advocate just pinning the defender with a block in this situation until he stops flopping.

I have only had one situation where a kid literally threw himself back and screamed and there was no contact. I saw this in a varsity game in my second year I believe and I was frozen as to what to do. Never seen that before. That is the only situation where I would now call a T for a blatant flop or faking being fouled. I usually just pass on fouls when I feel there is just simply no foul.

Peace

I'm not saying I call it....I have 1-2 times in over 20 years...and have passed on flops that were clearly deserving. I call it consistent with how others call it. But that doesn't change what the rule really says. Some try to twist the words to try to make it sound like it is saying something other that what it says rather than just admitting we just don't call it as it is written.