Calling all Rules Experts - Flagrant 1

[01Neaggrad02]

Doty decked Bria Smith. Geno thought there was no contact, Walz asked the refs to take a second look and they did and assessed the flagrant 1. It was a case of Doty swinging her elbows to make space, and I believe that was the year refs started making a point of calling the flagrant if you swung your elbows and made contact above the shoulders. I don't think Doty was trying to knock anyone down in the opening minutes of that game when the score was 7-5 or something like that. Compare that to the flagrant given to Vails or Reed with about 7 minutes left in the game when she hooked Stef by the neck and slammed her to the ground. That was the payback, I guess with a little frustration of being down 30 mixed in, and I thought could have been a flagrant 2 since it looked intentional to me.

Decked????? That is pushing it.... She was swinging her elbows trying to make space. It was contact..... but it was a bad call...

 

[01Neaggrad02]

It happened near the end of the 4th Q, just under the 2:00 mark

I just rewatched it.... It really should have been a Flagrant 1

 

[JRRRJ]

Rule 10-1.14

Art. 14. Illegal contact caused by the swinging of the elbow(s) that:

a. Results from total body movement is a common or flagrant 1 personal foul.
b. Is excessive per Rule 4-19.7 is a flagrant 2 foul.
c. Occurs above or below the shoulders of an opponent is a common, [ or ] flagrant 1 or flagrant 2 personal foul.

Not sure what your reference to "1.1, 1.4 and 1.5" meant...? No argument from me that it was at least a foul (illegal contact) when she got clocked in the throat. Question is whether it was a flagrant, which hinges on "excessive" in the ref's judgment for the most part.

In your notation, 1.1 would be Rule 10-1.1 etc. And, somehow, I managed to miss the "common or" phrase in all my readings of the Article 14. :^(

 

[VAMike23]

In your notation, 1.1 would be Rule 10-1.1 etc. And, somehow, I managed to miss the "common or" phrase in all my readings of the Article 14. :^(

No worries - I get a little too 'lawyerly' sometimes; I apologize if it came across as anything other than a purely objective back-and-forth

 

[huskies29]

Didn't think the hit to chong merited a flagrant as it looked like it was the follow through of a shot attempt. On the other hand the gabby forearm-elbow to the throat should have been a flagrant one as it was a careless blow whether intentional or not to the throat area. Hard to believe that play which happened at the foul line was missed by all 3 officials supposedly watching play. My guess is geno with less than 2 minutes left didn't want to antagonize a game that was over and his seeing gabby staying in the game might have been a factor in that.