Landing on Kia Nurse's Head

[carpe diem]

I was miffed at the time and still am when Kia's head was landed on by a Temple player: why is it not a foul if you are already on the ground trying to secure the ball and one of the other teams players takes a flying leap and lands on your head. No foul, tie ball. I have seen this before in contested balls and usually no foul is called. Can someone impart some insight into why this is? My own personal experience playing in a high school JV game was getting knocked unconscious when someone landed on my head going for a loose ball so I do not remember if a foul was called.

 

[WiseOne]

I'm definitely with u on this one! Kia should've done what her brother did to the other hockey player! # Beatdown

 

[ricky]

I'm definitely with u on this one! Kia should've done what her brother did to the other hockey player! # Beatdown

Kick her a##!!!!!

 

[JavaMan]

I was waiting for a foul to be called. Should have been. It appeared that Kia was looking around for a call also.

 

[DaddyChoc]

that was ugly... that needs to be reviewed, it was scary

 

[bellairehusky]

I thought they gave Kia the timeout before the head slam, hence no foul.

 

[JavaMan]

I thought they gave Kia the timeout before the head slam, hence no foul.

Correct...but wrong. What would happen with a rule like that in hockey, or football, or baseball, or boxing?

 

[cohenzone]

I'm definitely with u on this one! Kia should've done what her brother did to the other hockey player! # Beatdown

My, how women's hoop fans have evolved. And the snobs on the Men's board think we're a bunch of pansies.

 

[Zorro]

Nah, we baaaaad!

 

[geneticrex]

My, how women's hoop fans have evolved. And the snobs on the Men's board think we're a bunch of pansies.

It's easy to label people 'pansies' on a keyboard due to the 'consequence' factor.

In real life, not so easy.

 

[vtcwbuff]

I think that all loose balls should be awarded to UConn because after all - they are UConn. Opposing teams should not be allowed to compete for any loose ball and if, God forbid, there should be any contact with a UConn player while trying to secure a loose ball the offending player should be sent immediately to the penalty box.

Whenever a play like that occurs, I try to look at the play objectively. Would I have thought it a foul if a UConn player, while diving for a loose ball, accidentally landed on an opponent? Besides, if the ball was dead and if there was no obvious intent (intent would resulted in a technical) to concuss than there should be no foul ( BB rules guys can weigh in here).

The only confusion for me was if Nurse called the TO before she was thumped. If I understood the commentators correctly she did.

 

[Woof 101]

I thought they gave Kia the timeout before the head slam, hence no foul.

Technically (pun intended) the official if on the ball (again) . Should have called a dead ball foul which would be a technical.
Rule 10 / Fouls And Penalties Page 93 Article 16 states:
A player flagrantly or excessively contacting an opponent while the ball is dead.
http://g-macsports.com/custompages/...oks/Basketball_Womens_Rule_Book_2013-2015.pdf
A time out does not excuse a foul, no malice, just say'n.

 

[bellairehusky]

Technically (pun intended) the official if on the ball (again) . Should have called a dead ball foul which would be a technical.
Rule 10 / Fouls And Penalties Page 93 Article 16 states:
A player flagrantly or excessively contacting an opponent while the ball is dead.
http://g-macsports.com/custompages/...oks/Basketball_Womens_Rule_Book_2013-2015.pdf
A time out does not excuse a foul, no malice, just say'n.

Yes, it would have to have been a flagrant foul at the dead ball for it to be called. You can argue that what happened was flagrant or not. A player diving for a ball and landing on someones head is not necessarily a flagrant foul. It could be a regular foul, which means no foul called since the foul occurred after the time out. a timeout does in fact excuse a regular foul not a flagrant one.

 

[Checkmate]

Great thread, I see fouls called when there is no contact (or minimal) on a drive to the basket. Then there is a lose ball and it looks like an NFL fumble- anything goes

 

[bellairehusky]

Great thread, I see fouls called when there is no contact (or minimal) on a drive to the basket. Then there is a lose ball and it looks like an NFL fumble- anything goes

A foul is when the ref blows the whistle and calls a foul, whatever the definition is!

 

[housekeys]

Loose balls and possible tie-ups should only occur when players are face-to-face. Under no circumstance should a player tie up the ball while "gently" wrapping the arms around a players back. It should be a foul. This is not the rule. I wish it was.

Likewise, going for a loose ball and clipping another player should be an automatic foul, independent of whether the player actually gets the ball. It is a penalty in football for gods sake. BTW, I have seen Kia be guilty of this and she was not called, so this is not a UConn vs everyone else thing.

 

[HardHatGuy#2]

I agree that a foul should have been called. But I think back to the Men vs. Duke in the 1999 NC game, when Jake Voskuhl channele his inner Hulk Hogan and dropped the big elbow on a Duke player chasing after a loose ball.

Difference: In that case, they were after a loose ball, in this case, Nurse had the ball, and they were trying to get it loose. Flagrant 1; two shots and the ball.

 

[Woof 101]

Yes, it would have to have been a flagrant foul at the dead ball for it to be called. You can argue that what happened was flagrant or not. A player diving for a ball and landing on someones head is not necessarily a flagrant foul. It could be a regular foul, which means no foul called since the foul occurred after the time out. a timeout does in fact excuse a regular foul not a flagrant one.

Again no personal attack here but you missed the second portion / interpretation of the rule. While it may have not been done in a flagrant manner it was excessive. Accidental or not it should have been called.
I guess like beauty, head smashing is in the eyes of the beholder / official .

 

[Biff]

 

[bellairehusky]

Again no personal attack here but you missed the second portion / interpretation of the rule. While it may have not been done in a flagrant manner it was excessive. Accidental or not it should have been called.
I guess like beauty, head smashing is in the eyes of the beholder / official .

I agree it's interpetation. Had a flagrant/excessive foul been called I would not have argued it. But personally I would not have called that play flagrant or excessive. When a ball is on the floor and players jump towards it, I would call it a foul and not flagrant or excessive unless there was clear intent. I agree with others that they should call more fouls on plays such as this - might be why jump balls are called so quickly so as to avoid the "fumbled ball scrum".

 

[j66kicker]

I didn't see at any big deal. Everybody trying to get the ball. Don't tell me Kia wouldn't have been diving in the pile if she was on the other side of it (I love that, BTW).

 

[Sonny44]

Mo got clobbered too going after a loose ball. No call there either.

 

[Geno-ista]

I thought they gave Kia the timeout before the head slam, hence no foul.

If she called the timeout prior to the girl jumping on her head, then there only would have been a "dead ball foul", which they would have to dream flagrant and/or intentional. You are correct. I replayed it 5 times- The other issue is, she was so out of position to even make an attempt on that ball- which should have been the foul call. And her head got pounded. It really has become open season on UConn, IMO because we are just so good- they don't call the game evenly.

 

[DaddyChoc]

cause it happened AFTER the timeout was called... makes it even worse

 

[Woof 101]

Biff solves the debate with his video! Proper call should have been a double dribble on Kia before the scrum even took place!
Having said that, nothing like some good banter / dialog with a few facts thrown into the mix. This is part of why Connecticut fans are considered some of the most intelligent in the game!