Page 2913 of 3370 FirstFirst ... 1913241328132863290329112912291329142915292329633013 ... LastLast
Results 58,241 to 58,260 of 67392
  1. #58241
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    January can get [stuffed].

  2. #58242
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    Quote Originally Posted by ClemmonsDevil View Post
    Thanks. I went with the "There are good people on both sides here" argument.
    you are a well known ref suck up.

  3. #58243
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    So — should I bother reading it or not?

  4. #58244
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Phredd3 View Post
    You are, I'm sorry to say, completely wrong. This is a textbook Flagrant 1 foul.



    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.
    OK, I'm wrong. Damn those refs!

  5. #58245
    Quote Originally Posted by aimo View Post
    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.
    I think this is substantively correct. It warranted a foul call, but it was missed. Then the refs were unwilling to call it flagrant vs intentional. DFRI Aimo.

  6. #58246
    Quote Originally Posted by budwom View Post
    you are a well known ref suck up.
    Unnecessary. True. But unnecessary.

  7. #58247
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    Quote Originally Posted by aimo View Post
    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.
    Yes, you are completely wrong on this one. Intent has nothing to do with it. If, for example, a defender bites at a shot fake by a shooter and then falls completely on top of him, it is most definitely a foul regardless of lack of intent.

  8. #58248
    Quote Originally Posted by budwom View Post
    Yes, you are completely wrong on this one. Intent has nothing to do with it. If, for example, a defender bites at a shot fake by a shooter and then falls completely on top of him, it is most definitely a foul regardless of lack of intent.
    The refs chose to count this as incidental contact rather than flagrant. It's cool to disagree with them. I would argue her larger point that a common foul call was the easiest remedy is correct. They just missed it.

  9. #58249
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vermont
    Quote Originally Posted by ClemmonsDevil View Post
    The refs chose to count this as incidental contact rather than flagrant. It's cool to disagree with them. I would argue her larger point that a common foul call was the easiest remedy is correct. They just missed it.
    yep, common foul it may well be, but definitely a foul. Intent doesn't play into it.

  10. #58250
    Quote Originally Posted by budwom View Post
    yep, common foul it may well be, but definitely a foul. Intent doesn't play into it.
    I agree at least sort of. But the referee saw this as incidental. They do have wide latitude to do that. It's reasonable to disagree.

    In real time my reaction is I had no idea what I would call in that situation.

  11. #58251
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Dur'm
    Quote Originally Posted by ClemmonsDevil View Post
    The refs chose to count this as incidental contact rather than flagrant. It's cool to disagree with them. I would argue her larger point that a common foul call was the easiest remedy is correct. They just missed it.
    Incidental to what? It was not a basketball play. He was making no attempt to play offense or defense, so it cannot be incidental contact. He was celebrating, and he happened to catch an opponent square in the throat. It's a defined flagrant 1. It's not even correctly called as a common foul. The refs are required by the rules to assess a flagrant 1. They failed to make the correct call, pure and simple.

    Just to be completely clear, it's not the reason that Duke lost the game. Not at all. It was, however, an egregiously bad reffing decision.

  12. #58252
    Quote Originally Posted by Phredd3 View Post
    Incidental to what? It was not a basketball play. He was making no attempt to play offense or defense, so it cannot be incidental contact. He was celebrating, and he happened to catch an opponent square in the throat. It's a defined flagrant 1. It's not even correctly called as a common foul. The refs are required by the rules to assess a flagrant 1. They failed to make the correct call, pure and simple.

    Just to be completely clear, it's not the reason that Duke lost the game. Not at all. It was, however, an egregiously bad reffing decision.

    My original take. I don't mind if you disagree. Perfectly reasonable to. I even disagreed with me. I think it's how the refs interpreted it.

    "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."

  13. #58253
    Lots of meetings

  14. #58254
    Quote Originally Posted by YmoBeThere View Post
    Lots of meetings
    "A committee is a cul-de-sac down which ideas are lured and then quietly strangled."
    Barnett Cocks

  15. #58255
    Quote Originally Posted by wilson View Post
    January can get [stuffed].
    I’d like to fast forward to March.

  16. #58256
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Outside Philly
    Quote Originally Posted by ClemmonsDevil View Post
    "A committee is a cul-de-sac down which ideas are lured and then quietly strangled."
    Barnett Cocks
    I love words and how they can be assembled for our amusement.

    Also, that’s a banging name!

  17. #58257
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Quote Originally Posted by YmoBeThere View Post
    I’d like to fast forward to March.
    Oh yes, it will be February's turn to get [stuffed] in due time.

  18. #58258
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Outside Philly
    Does everyone have classified information at their house?

  19. #58259
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Undisclosed
    Quote Originally Posted by bundabergdevil View Post
    Does everyone have classified information at their house?
    Can’t tell you.

  20. #58260
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by bundabergdevil View Post
    Does everyone have classified information at their house?
    I do, but it's MY classified information, no one else's.

Similar Threads

  1. Duke History (new thread-- posts moved from unrelated thread)
    By jimsumner in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 12-25-2019, 08:15 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •