The longest thread ever

[ClemmonsDevil]

People are pretty testy on DBR today.

I love Duke and I hate Duke fans.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

I love Duke and I hate Duke fans.

Hahahaha.

Well. To be fair, the last two mornings I have not been part of the solution.

[ClemmonsDevil]

Hahahaha.

Well. To be fair, the last two mornings I have not been part of the solution.

I will never understand complaints and being upset about a single game. Seems dumb and suggests that person never played. Hell, I don't get upset about a single season.

[bundabergdevil]

I will never understand complaints and being upset about a single game. Seems dumb and suggests that person never played. Hell, I don't get upset about a single season.

You’re not married to a Hokie.

[ClemmonsDevil]

You’re not married to a Hokie.

Wouldn't matter. Other than her being slightly more miserable.

[Rich]

I will never understand complaints and being upset about a single game. Seems dumb and suggests that person never played. Hell, I don't get upset about a single season.

For many years I took Duke basketball waaaaay too seriously. The last few years not so much. Life has a way of changing perspectives.

[budwom]

For many years I took Duke basketball waaaaay too seriously. The last few years not so much. Life has a way of changing perspectives.

how was Staten Island?

[ClemmonsDevil]

For many years I took Duke basketball waaaaay too seriously. The last few years not so much. Life has a way of changing perspectives.

My reaction is purely based on my dad being a coach and me seeing Sports fandom as a long thread that isn't really made up of individual seasons. It's all one continuous through line for me.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

My reaction is purely based on my dad being a coach and me seeing Sports fandom as a long thread that isn't really made up of individual seasons. It's all one continuous through line for me.

I rarely get bent out of shape about losses or ref calls. Like, very very rarely. But watching our player take a punch to the throat with no consequence was pretty appalling.

[ClemmonsDevil]

I rarely get bent out of shape about losses or ref calls. Like, very very rarely. But watching our player take a punch to the throat with no consequence was pretty appalling.

I've only ever seen one play like that and it seems to me that Singler did something similar to an opposing player once. But that was before the current flagrant versus intentional rules. Because it was inadvertent and after the play then I understand the no call. Since it is such a singular play I would almost approach it like inadvertent contact from a player running his head into the head of a player behind him when the ball switches possession. It can be called a foul because contact clearly occurs that is foul worthy. But I do understand why they didn't call a foul there. This one is such a special case that I can completely understand why you feel differently and I don't think you're wrong. I just understand why it was officiated the way it was. I do think you have to wonder if there were 7 minutes left in the game if a foul is called there. And if it would have been, then it should have been called in this situation as well.

[budwom]

I rarely get bent out of shape about losses or ref calls. Like, very very rarely. But watching our player take a punch to the throat with no consequence was pretty appalling.

Yeah, I generally avoid the post game threads after a loss, too much predictable carnage.

The whack to the throat is definitely an interesting case. For sure it was explicitly unintentional, but since when do things have to be intentional for a foul to be called? You can get faked out on a shot and land on a guy unintentionally, but the net result is he got fouled. Can players now celebrate each basket with Whirling Dervish punch throwing to clear their way downcourt?

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

Yeah, I generally avoid the post game threads after a loss, too much predictable carnage.

The whack to the throat is definitely an interesting case. For sure it was explicitly unintentional, but since when do things have to be intentional for a foul to be called? You can get faked out on a shot and land on a guy unintentionally, but the net result is he got fouled. Can players now celebrate each basket with Whirling Dervish punch throwing to clear their way downcourt?

Exactly. I'm not a "whine about the refs" guy. That isn't my mojo. But I am a "let's keep our young men from getting punched in the throat so hard they are dry heaving on the bench" kinda guy.

[budwom]

Exactly. I'm not a "whine about the refs" guy. That isn't my mojo. But I am a "let's keep our young men from getting punched in the throat so hard they are dry heaving on the bench" kinda guy.

For what little it is worth, the ACC will need to explain this call. Very bad precedent. In fact many of the flagrant 1 calls we see are not necessarily intentional, guys get rebounds, swing the elbows a bit, sometimes they make contact, sometimes not.

[Rich]

Yeah, I generally avoid the post game threads after a loss, too much predictable carnage.

The whack to the throat is definitely an interesting case. For sure it was explicitly unintentional, but since when do things have to be intentional for a foul to be called? You can get faked out on a shot and land on a guy unintentionally, but the net result is he got fouled. Can players now celebrate each basket with Whirling Dervish punch throwing to clear their way downcourt?

Another classic example is when a guy is on the floor and another player trips over him and they call a foul on the first guy. The pundits I've read this morning all say a call should've been made.

[ClemmonsDevil]

Exactly. I'm not a "whine about the refs" guy. That isn't my mojo. But I am a "let's keep our young men from getting punched in the throat so hard they are dry heaving on the bench" kinda guy.

To second guess myself, which is reasonable to do because I'm not married to my response, there is a strong predilection among officials to not influence play in end of game situations. But if your prior is to call a foul except in a late game situation, you are influencing the play. I say to doctors all the time that they are conflating "first do no harm" with "first do nothing". Sometimes inaction is harm.

[YmoBeThere]

To second guess myself, which is reasonable to do because I'm not married to my response

No worries, we do all the time. (Second guess you...)

[ClemmonsDevil]

No worries, we do all the time. (Second guess you...)

Thanks. I went with the "There are good people on both sides here" argument.

[aimo]

I took the situation as this: The guy was celebrating and inadvertently hit Flip in the throat. The refs did not see the incident, the one ref saw Flip hunched over in pain. They reviewed, found it not flagrant b/c it was not intentional, and they could not suddenly call a regular foul b/c they cannot be called on reviews if they were not called to begin with.

Or am I completely wrong?

Yes, it sucks, but it was not on purpose and it was not seen/called as foul by the ref to begin with, so nothing COULD be called. Kind of like when Tractor Trailer shoved Wojo out of bounds during a dead ball and nothing was called b/c he was so good at doing that when the refs backs were turned.

[missfinch]

For many years I took Duke basketball waaaaay too seriously. The last few years not so much. Life has a way of changing perspectives.

Yeah I will admit to having “negative reactions” but they are limited to the privacy of my own couch, and these days they are more just disappointment in the moment (insert OPK honeymoon joke here) than any true anger or disgust. But everyone knows the officiating is always biased against Duke basketball and Alabama football. At least in my house.

[Phredd3]

I took the situation as this: The guy was celebrating and inadvertently hit Flip in the throat. The refs did not see the incident, the one ref saw Flip hunched over in pain. They reviewed, found it not flagrant b/c it was not intentional, and they could not suddenly call a regular foul b/c they cannot be called on reviews if they were not called to begin with.

Or am I completely wrong?

You are, I'm sorry to say, completely wrong. This is a textbook Flagrant 1 foul.

Rule 4-15.2c. Flagrant personal fouls

1. Flagrant 1 personal foul. A flagrant 1 personal foul is a personal foul that is deemed excessive in nature (unwarranted or too much) and/or unnecessary (avoidable, uncalled for or not required by the circumstances of the play), but is not based solely on the severity of the act. Examples include, but are not limited to:

...

h) Contact with an opponent that is not the result of a normal basketball play. "Normal basketball play" is defined as any activity by a player, including incidental contact, which is generally accepted as that which occurs in a basketball game when the player is attempting to make a legal offensive or defensive play.

I don't see any way this doesn't fall under this provision of the rules, and given that the contact is above the shoulders, it is a borderline flagrant 2. Intent does play an explicit role in assessing a flagrant 2, however, so I would not advocate for that. But a punch is clearly "excessive in nature", and it equally clearly wasn't a "basketball play", so I don't see how it is possible NOT to call a flagrant 1 there. That's a bad enough miss that I honestly do think the league office should be involved. Letting that go sets a terrible precedent.