THat could have been called a flagrant foul nevermind a foul...

[Adesmar123]

nm

 

[HuskyBandDad]

We think alike.

 

[Waquoit]

That wasn't in the same zipcode as a flagrant foul

 

[Adesmar123]

and I suppose it wasn't a foul either..

 

[arch]

That wasn't in the same zipcode as a flagrant foul

Why would you believe that? It wasn't intentional but looked flagrant to me. Zip code??[/quote]

 

[stamfordhusky]

That wasn't in the same zipcode as a flagrant foul

FWIW, here is the relevant rules definition of a flagrant foul: "Causing excessive contact with an opponent while playing the ball"


It's up to the refs to decide if the contact is "excessive".

 

[Waquoit]

FWIW, here is the relevant rules definition of a flagrant foul: "Causing excessive contact with an opponent while playing the ball"


It's up to the refs to decide if the contact is "excessive".

If that was UConn that did that and they called a flagrant foul, Geno's explosion would have made today's look like a poetry reading.

 

[Icebear]

It wasn't a flagrant foul at all. Fully within the play but it was completely and unmitigatedly blatant.

 

[triaddukefan]

I didnt see the first half, who was the offending turtle ?

 

[Icebear]

Hawkins

 

[VAMike23]

I did not think it was close to being flagrant. MD player made a hard play on the ball and it was just a hard foul. Also there was no secondary contact like pulling her to the floor, raking, or a head shot.

 

[cannon]

If you think that was a flagrant, you're delusional.

 

[jsloanjr]

what did coach Frese say after the game?.............