FT flopping, then Flagrant Foul.

[JRutledge]

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

[walt]

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.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by walt

I believe the ended up giving the player who did the pushing a FF1. I agree with that.

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

[JugglingReferee]

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

[bballref3966]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

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

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

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by bballref3966

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

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

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by bainsey

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

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.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by AremRed

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.

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

[just another ref]

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.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by bainsey

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

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..

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

If the offensive player had not exaggerated, the defensive player would have gotten away with foul.

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.

[Raymond]

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

[APG]

Originally Posted by bainsey

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.

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!