Offensive Flagrant 1: LSU at WVU (Video)

[Nevadaref]

Posting a video clip of the offensive flagrant 1 at the 9:56 mark of the first half in the LSU at West Virginia game today on ESPN2 would be nice.
Thanks to our video guys as usual for their awesome work.

[JetMetFan]

Here's the play...you're welcome.

[Raymond]

video review, leading to F1 in my opinion.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

video review, leading to F1 in my opinion.

Agree.

[billyu2]

Looks like the Trail has the call first. He even comes in to take control of the call. The Lead appears to be willing to let the Trail take it but then the Trail suddenly gives it up leaving the whole sequence looking a little awkward.

Easy F1

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

1) Joe did not close down and therefore missed the illegal use of the hands foul by W-1 on B-3.

2) The Flagrant Foul #1 that Joe called on B-3, while "correct" by rule, really cannot be supported by rule (even though the Rules Committee "wishes" it to be), because B-3 was holding his arms in a normal basketball position of holding the ball above his head in preparation to either pass or shoot the ball. Therefore, B-3's elbow contacting W-1 was nothing more that a Common Foul (in this case a Player Control Foul) against B-1.

MTD, Sr.

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

1) Joe did not close down and therefore missed the illegal use of the hands foul by W-1 on B-3.

Don't know about that one Mark, defender got a lot of ball. Supervisors at this level want quality calls on bigs, especially starters. I don't think this would be a quality foul.

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

2) The Flagrant Foul #1 that Joe called on B-3, while "correct" by rule, really cannot be supported by rule (even though the Rules Committee "wishes" it to be), because B-3 was holding his arms in a normal basketball position of holding the ball above his head in preparation to either pass or shoot the ball. Therefore, B-3's elbow contacting W-1 was nothing more that a Common Foul (in this case a Player Control Foul) against B-1.

Maybe if he was holding the ball still but he swung his elbows creating the illegal contact. With the emphasis on calling flagrant fouls with contact above the shoulders this is an easy flagrant.

Originally Posted by billyu2

Looks like the Trail has the call first. He even comes in to take control of the call. The Lead appears to be willing to let the Trail take it but then the Trail suddenly gives it up leaving the whole sequence looking a little awkward.

Probably because Trail shouldn't have had a whistle. Needs to give Lead first crack at this, then come in with a cadence if Lead doesn't blow. I could be wrong, perhaps those mechanics are suspended in the case of flagrant contact.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Don't know about that one Mark, defender got a lot of ball. Supervisors at this level want quality calls on bigs, especially starters. I don't think this would be a quality foul.



Maybe if he was holding the ball still but he swung his elbows creating the illegal contact. With the emphasis on calling flagrant fouls with contact above the shoulders this is an easy flagrant.



Probably because Trail shouldn't have had a whistle. Needs to give Lead first crack at this, then come in with a cadence if Lead doesn't blow. I could be wrong, perhaps those mechanics are suspended in the case of flagrant contact.

AremRed:

Regarding Item (1) : a) At the very beginning of the video Joe never closes down. b) Then start looking about 21 seconds into the video. W-1 fouls B-3 with his right hand and arm.

MTD, Sr.

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

W-1 fouls B-3 with his right hand and arm.

That's a lot of ball Mark. Not a foul at this level.

http://imgur.com/hxZIByl

[ballgame99]

Just for clarification, under NFHS, this would be an intentional with the option to upgrade to flagrant (and ejection) if it was excessive or done with some intention?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by ballgame99

Just for clarification, under NFHS, this would be an intentional with the option to upgrade to flagrant (and ejection) if it was excessive or done with some intention?

I'm not sure I would use the "option to upgrade" language, but yes, this would be an IP in FED. If the elbows were swung excessively, then it's an FP.

[j51969]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I'm not sure I would use the "option to upgrade" language, but yes, this would be an IP in FED. If the elbows were swung excessively, then it's an FP.

Given the guidance we have been given here in IL (excessive contact above the shoulder), especially in the last few 4 years what do you call?

IMO I am sending the teams to bench area, and asking for information from my partners on what they may have seen. At the HS level I would have to be talked out of an FP.

1.There is a difference between a stationary object (head) getting hit by an elbow that's in motion. Which is what this looked like to me.

or

2. A defender who is moving toward or into an object already in motion.

[walt]

No foul on W-1. F1 after monitor review.

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by j51969

Given the guidance we have been given here in IL (excessive contact above the shoulder), especially in the last few 4 years what do you call?

IMO I am sending the teams to bench area, and asking for information from my partners on what they may have seen. At the HS level I would have to be talked out of an FP.

1.There is a difference between a stationary object (head) getting hit by an elbow that's in motion. Which is what this looked like to me.

or

2. A defender who is moving toward or into an object already in motion.

Intentional Foul. I don't see anything that warrants a FP in this play.