Change Ad Consent
Do not sell my data
Reply to thread | The Boneyard
Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Chat
UConn Men's Basketball
UConn Women's Basketball
UConn Football
Media
The Uconn Blog
Verbal Commits
This is UConn Country
Field of 68
CT Scoreboard Podcasts
A Dime Back
Sliders and Curveballs Podcast
Storrs Central
Men's Basketball
News
Roster
Schedule
Standings
Women's Basketball
News
Roster
Schedule
Standings
Football
News
Roster
Depth Chart
Schedule
Football Recruiting
Offers
Commits
Donate
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
UConn Athletics
UConn Women's Basketball Forum
What was the correct ruling on the flagrant?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
[QUOTE="willtalk, post: 2139941, member: 1220"] In respect to the flagrant the rule itself is somewhat ambiguous. They are supposed to call any contact to the head ( above the shoulder ). Now it does not seem to specify the circumstances necessary for that contact to be a flagrant. I mean there are many instances where their might be contact to the head were a flagrant would not really be called. For example if a players hand or arm makes contact with another players head while they are wrestling for the ball either on the floor or after a rebound. Technically they are making contact with the head but logically it should not be a flagrant. In this case it appears they officials gave in to the pressure of the letter of the law. They were afraid not to make it a flagrant because their was contact with the chin. A slow motion replay shows that the defender had their arms raised to defend against a pass. It was as they were running side by side that incidental contact took place between the defenders arm/wrist area and lou's chin. The defender was not swinging her arm ( in a round house way that creates force ) such as usually causes a flagrant to be called. Not much is possible when you are running with your hands raised. While technically it fit the criteria it goes against the purpose for flagrant's, which is to protect players from head injuries. This should have and would have been a no call except for Lou's dramatics. It sort of forced the officials to CYA themselves. If you read my past posts you will discover that I have been a fan of MLS's game for quite some time. I have watched her play in high school and loved her game and skill. The one thing about her I did not like was her flopping. She had developed a reputation for that in California. I can sort of understand why she began to do that. When you are a great player you are going to be mugged by lesser opposition so it sort of makes you want to compensate via exaggeration. You have to protect yourself because often the officials will not. However, in MLS's case it has become a bad habit used to get calls. I for one have never been a fan of the tactics players use to get an advantage which unfortunately has become part of the "Game" so to speak. That includes learning how to hold or use other illegal tactics without being caught. . It seem to be the win at any cost mentality that is prevalent in today's society. It is one thing to sell a charge but is is another to grasp one's throat where no contact was made to sell a flagrant. She is too good a player to have to resort to that sort of thing. And more important what sort of message do we send to the younger generation when we encourage this sort of thing. Its unethical and flies in the face of what the term "Sport" used to mean. To be a good sport. Fairness honest competition. etc. How often do we selectively cherry pick the area's where we choose to be ethical and which areas we do not. Integrity requires consistency. [/QUOTE]
Verification
First name of men's bb coach
Post reply
Forum statistics
Threads
164,582
Messages
4,402,112
Members
10,216
Latest member
illini2013
.
..
Forums
UConn Athletics
UConn Women's Basketball Forum
What was the correct ruling on the flagrant?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top
Bottom