GophersInIowa
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2008
- Messages
- 40,512
- Reaction score
- 21,440
- Points
- 113
I'm mixed on the new flagrant 1 and flagrant 2 rules this year. I'm all about protecting the players, but think it goes a little overboard sometimes.
In today's Nebraska - Penn St. game, Nebraska was up 3 with about 30 seconds left. NE inbounded it and the player with the ball was immediately trapped. He swung the ball around and his elbow made contact with a Penn St. player's head. One of the refs was right there and didn't call anything. A few seconds later Penn St. stole the ball and was fouled. The refs went back to look at the replay and determined it was a flagrant 1, meaning Penn St. would get an extra two free throws and the ball. As it turned out, Penn St. missed 3 of the 4 free throws and still lost the game. But it could have meant Penn St. getting the lead and getting the ball.
Here's my issue with it: It would have been a lot better for NE for the ref to have called it when it happened, not later on after looking at the replay. Therefore it would have been just two free throws and the ball, instead of four. How the ref missed it is beyond me. I don't think the same thing should be awarded (two free throws and the ball) if the refs didn't call it on the floor. Maybe should be just one free throw if they don't call it a foul originally.
Am I crazy? Does anyone agree?
In today's Nebraska - Penn St. game, Nebraska was up 3 with about 30 seconds left. NE inbounded it and the player with the ball was immediately trapped. He swung the ball around and his elbow made contact with a Penn St. player's head. One of the refs was right there and didn't call anything. A few seconds later Penn St. stole the ball and was fouled. The refs went back to look at the replay and determined it was a flagrant 1, meaning Penn St. would get an extra two free throws and the ball. As it turned out, Penn St. missed 3 of the 4 free throws and still lost the game. But it could have meant Penn St. getting the lead and getting the ball.
Here's my issue with it: It would have been a lot better for NE for the ref to have called it when it happened, not later on after looking at the replay. Therefore it would have been just two free throws and the ball, instead of four. How the ref missed it is beyond me. I don't think the same thing should be awarded (two free throws and the ball) if the refs didn't call it on the floor. Maybe should be just one free throw if they don't call it a foul originally.
Am I crazy? Does anyone agree?