Belmont vs Clemson Video requests v2 (Video)

[yooperbballref]

Two plays stuck out to me in the few minutes of the game that I watched.

At 13:10 there was a flagrant foul that I could see and argument being made going either way, and at the 10:20 mark an over and back call no call that I can't see how was missed.

[APG]

No verbiage discussion here

Flagrant 1:



Backcourt Play:

Play 1: Nothing.

Play 2: Back court violation.

[JRutledge]

Play #1: Nothing at all.

Play #2: Clearly a BC violation unless I am missing the ball touching by the defender. Not a great angle or close up to help out.

Peace

[Rich]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Play #1: Nothing at all.

Play #2: Clearly a BC violation unless I am missing the ball touching by the defender. Not a great angle or close up to help out.

Peace

I think even if it *was* touched by the defender, it still had frontcourt status when the second A player touched the ball.

[ballgame99]

1: that's a rough call. I got nothing
2: with that official standing right there I'm going to assume he saw, or thought he saw, the defense deflect it. It did look like the angle of the pass changed a bit. That big orange paw doesn't help matters like this.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Rich

I think even if it *was* touched by the defender, it still had frontcourt status when the second A player touched the ball.

True. I was just hoping that maybe a touch distracted the official.

Peace

[HokiePaul]

Play #1: looked like the correct call at full speed. With multiple angles on replay, not so much

Play #2: Not sure if the official saw a defender touch it, but from what I can tell in the video, it looks like a missed back court violation.

[Raymond]

#1) I have a B22 tripping W32 for a common foul

#2) He missed a violation. Either a kicked ball (and he points at B22's foot) or a BC violation.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

#1) I have a B22 tripping W32 for a common foul

#2) He missed a violation. Either a kicked ball (and he points at B22's foot) or a BC violation.

That's what got me on play 2...he points at the defender to say the defender touched he ball. If he did touch it, it had to be a kick ball violation. Weird.

On first play, I see why he called what he called. When he watches the replays, that official might want that FF1 back.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

That's what got me on play 2...he points at the defender to say the defender punched he ball. If he did touch it, it had to be a kick ball violation. Weird.

On first play, I see why he called what he called. When he watches the replays, that official might want that FF1 back.

Agree on both. The first should be one violation or another (kick or BC). Can't be nothing.

As for the foul, I could go either way. I'd probably have common but I couldn't disagree with FF1.

[Toren]

Play 1: Offensive foul


Play 2: back court violation