swood1000
01-25-2011, 02:21 PM
A visit to the message board on Inside Carolina is quite an experience – reminding one of what a visit to Bedlam hospital in England must have been like prior to the introduction of antipsychotic medications. For those who have not visited, let me use just one example to demonstrate the tenor of the discourse found there.
A complaint about “flopping” by Duke players is heard incessantly, almost mantra-like. Let’s start with a definition of a “flop” (from Wikipedia): “a pejorative term that refers to a defensive player intentionally falling backward to the floor upon physical contact with an offensive player.” Again and again contributors to Inside Carolina are heard bewailing the pervasive flopping by Duke players, and complaining bitterly about what an ordeal it is that their players must be exposed to such odious behavior. Those who have never watched Carolina basketball may not appreciate the irony here, nor appreciate just how much Thorazine will likely be needed in order to bring equilibrium to Inside Carolina. First, take a look at this 40 second clip, which shows three garden-variety flops by Carolina in the first 11 minutes of their recent game against Clemson. (Sorry about the lack of editing refinement but I really do have other things to do. I realize that spending any time on this at all proves conclusively that I have way too much free time on my hands, but even so there are limits.)
(If you get a message from YouTube that “An error occurred, please try again later” it means that you have to adjust your browser to accept cookies.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7Eel1pSInU
Now, what might we expect to hear in response to this? That these were not really flops? Come now. That they were done on the initiative of the players and were not coached? Well, in defense of this, just after the second flop the camera turned to Coach Roy, who looks as if he might be thinking “Dadgummit, I’m so disappointed in Watts for resorting to a flop. That’s going to be 20 up and backs for him. I won’t stand for that!” Nevertheless, it must be acknowledged that either these flops were coached or the players are not required to pay attention to the coaching staff. We’ll charitably assume the former. Might we hear that these examples pale in comparison to an oft-cited flop by Greg Paulus when he was not even touched by the opposing player? Well now, isn’t this an assertion that a lack of artfulness is the principal transgression, and that the more obvious the flop, the more condemnation it deserves? It would seem that under this view flops that the officials find convincing should be condemned the least but our complainers, unaccountably, do not seem to adhere to this approach. Perhaps we will hear that this clip shows only three flops and that Duke commits many, many more than Carolina does. This would be an acknowledgment that flopping by Carolina players is indeed an organized and premeditated activity, making the situation equivalent to that of a man who admits to robbing one bank but who primly claims moral superiority over another man who he alleges has robbed two banks. If Carolina has fewer flops it must be because they are passing up some flopping opportunities; no doubt they are passing up the ones that would be, well, unseemly. Such high-mindedness is an inspiration to us all.
In the final analysis, what is to be concluded with respect to such a complaint? Macbeth may have put it best: “…it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”
A complaint about “flopping” by Duke players is heard incessantly, almost mantra-like. Let’s start with a definition of a “flop” (from Wikipedia): “a pejorative term that refers to a defensive player intentionally falling backward to the floor upon physical contact with an offensive player.” Again and again contributors to Inside Carolina are heard bewailing the pervasive flopping by Duke players, and complaining bitterly about what an ordeal it is that their players must be exposed to such odious behavior. Those who have never watched Carolina basketball may not appreciate the irony here, nor appreciate just how much Thorazine will likely be needed in order to bring equilibrium to Inside Carolina. First, take a look at this 40 second clip, which shows three garden-variety flops by Carolina in the first 11 minutes of their recent game against Clemson. (Sorry about the lack of editing refinement but I really do have other things to do. I realize that spending any time on this at all proves conclusively that I have way too much free time on my hands, but even so there are limits.)
(If you get a message from YouTube that “An error occurred, please try again later” it means that you have to adjust your browser to accept cookies.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7Eel1pSInU
Now, what might we expect to hear in response to this? That these were not really flops? Come now. That they were done on the initiative of the players and were not coached? Well, in defense of this, just after the second flop the camera turned to Coach Roy, who looks as if he might be thinking “Dadgummit, I’m so disappointed in Watts for resorting to a flop. That’s going to be 20 up and backs for him. I won’t stand for that!” Nevertheless, it must be acknowledged that either these flops were coached or the players are not required to pay attention to the coaching staff. We’ll charitably assume the former. Might we hear that these examples pale in comparison to an oft-cited flop by Greg Paulus when he was not even touched by the opposing player? Well now, isn’t this an assertion that a lack of artfulness is the principal transgression, and that the more obvious the flop, the more condemnation it deserves? It would seem that under this view flops that the officials find convincing should be condemned the least but our complainers, unaccountably, do not seem to adhere to this approach. Perhaps we will hear that this clip shows only three flops and that Duke commits many, many more than Carolina does. This would be an acknowledgment that flopping by Carolina players is indeed an organized and premeditated activity, making the situation equivalent to that of a man who admits to robbing one bank but who primly claims moral superiority over another man who he alleges has robbed two banks. If Carolina has fewer flops it must be because they are passing up some flopping opportunities; no doubt they are passing up the ones that would be, well, unseemly. Such high-mindedness is an inspiration to us all.
In the final analysis, what is to be concluded with respect to such a complaint? Macbeth may have put it best: “…it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”