Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="JoePgh, post: 2148562, member: 1131"] If you are referring to the six points quoted in your earlier post, the language that you quoted says that those are "examples" of a Flagrant 1, and that Flagrant 1 calls are not limited to those examples. So, per the letter of the law, the officials should not feel limited to those six specific situations. In this case, you have contact to the throat, away from the ball, not part of an attempt to make a play on the ball. I don't think Dillingham intentionally hit Lou, but I do think her arm motion was careless and out of control. The fact that the contact occurred with the hand or forearm rather than the elbow should (I would think) be insignificant. It appears to me to qualify as a Flagrant 1, and it appears that most objective people agree. Why was it not called in real time? I suspect that the officials were swallowing their whistle to avoid criticism for not "letting the players decide the game". Then, after the video review, they realized that their superiors who reviewed the game would undoubtedly deem it a flagrant and mark them down for having missed it. So they did what they could to remediate the situation, albeit with great reluctance. [/QUOTE]