Why didn't we shoot techinals after Bazz took an elbow to the head?
- Thread starter Palatine
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 2,088
- Reaction Score
- 6,880
they called the reach in on bazz then double T's i think
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2011
- Messages
- 28,425
- Reaction Score
- 75,663
Yeah but the elbow to the head is a special "1" so why didn't that trump everything? And don't we get possession as well?
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 9,519
- Reaction Score
- 24,108
Refs got that one right. Bazz took a little shot, he gave one back, that was really all that happened. Play on.
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2013
- Messages
- 1,906
- Reaction Score
- 2,936
They slapped Napier with the foul & technical too.
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2011
- Messages
- 28,425
- Reaction Score
- 75,663
An example of a Flagrant 1 foul would be when a player swings an elbow and makes illegal, non-excessive contact with an opponent above the shoulders. The team whose player was struck would receive two free throws and possession of the ball. Previously, this type of foul was called an intentional foul. The committee wanted to move away from the word “intentional,” because a player’s intent was never the point to the rule.
At the very least we should have gotten possession.
At the very least we should have gotten possession.
- Joined
- Apr 4, 2013
- Messages
- 27
- Reaction Score
- 60
It is sad that the game is now reffed in a way that people expect incidents like the Napier one tonight and the Brimah one last night to end in anything other than few harsh words and everybody playing on.
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2011
- Messages
- 28,425
- Reaction Score
- 75,663
So after the Bazz foul which gives side out to the Cards, we get a flagrant 1 which gives us two shots and the ball. It over rules the side out to the Cards. The the Bazz technical gives them two shots.
So they shots are either taken or zero each other out...but...
We get the ball.
So they shots are either taken or zero each other out...but...
We get the ball.
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 1,458
- Reaction Score
- 1,874
Flagrant fouls happen on a live ball, that was a dead ball situation since Napier had already committed a common foul. Therefore it could only be a technical.
The explanation I heard, and where I was, it was hard to hear the tv so if it was explained better there, I don't know, was that it wasn't a t for the elbow but for taunting as the elbow was part of the motion of his arm after the foul.
The explanation I heard, and where I was, it was hard to hear the tv so if it was explained better there, I don't know, was that it wasn't a t for the elbow but for taunting as the elbow was part of the motion of his arm after the foul.
- Status