Cole's "flagrant," Cartwright's "intentional"

DuffMan said:
The terminology they use would be an "intentional foul". The difference between intentional and flagarant is flagrant is defined as a savage act and the player must be ejected from the contest.
Click to expand...

I knew that, too, but overlooked it in phrasing my questions. Thanks for the explainer.
 
Thanks for the explanation on backcourt violation and why basket wasn't wiped away on Cole's foul. I think something needs to be done with that rule. Their are a lot of fouls missed throughout a game and they shouldn't be able to go to replay to see one. If they can then they should be able to wipe away a basket and make the whole call correct, not just part of it. I am all for replay and getting the correct calls in all sports, but if they are going to use it, they should be able to change more than just certain things imo.
 
DuffMan said:
The Cole play was absolutely correct.

The rule states that any time a players elbows rotate at a fast pace than the rest of thier body (which was the case) and contact is made with another player (with emphasis placed on contact made to the head or face) that it is an automatic intentional foul. This is regardless of intent. They are absolutely correct to use any video evidence for clarification on this matter. The KEY here is that his elbows were rotating at a faster pace than the rest of his body and contact was made, all else is irrelevant.

Had the player not went down it would have not likely resulted in an intentional foul as there would have been no TV stopage.

The intentional foul on Bryce was probably also correct, although this is more of a judgment issue. The official in his judgement ruled that the foul was not a legitimate attempt to steal the ball but rather an intentional act designed to stop a player with a "clear path" to the basket. This is 100% a judgement call and as such is certainly debatable but given the circumstances I'd say it was a reasonable call.

Remember on an intentional foul the degree of contact or "how hard" the foul was is of no significance.
Click to expand...
DuffMan, you are so wrong on the call against Cole. You quoted the correct rule, but the officials missed the call completely. I dare you to watch the replay and tell anyone that you honestly believe that Cole's elbows were not rotating towards the basket simply because that was the direction he was pivoting. I can't believe you even had the courage to post this. If Cole had intentionally elbowed this guy, he would still be horizontal. You should never post on the board again!
 
neiowahawk said:
Thanks for the explanation on backcourt violation and why basket wasn't wiped away on Cole's foul. I think something needs to be done with that rule. Their are a lot of fouls missed throughout a game and they shouldn't be able to go to replay to see one. If they can then they should be able to wipe away a basket and make the whole call correct, not just part of it. I am all for replay and getting the correct calls in all sports, but if they are going to use it, they should be able to change more than just certain things imo.
Click to expand...

I disagree with not using replay to spot intentional fouls. Suppose the foul had gone the other way -- Green threw an elbow that caught Cole in the face and sent him to the floor, yet the act wasn't caught in real time by the three court officials? I would want the officials to be able to stop the game, check the monitor and take the appropriate action.

I don't like the call last night on Cole as I thought it was purely accidental as he went to make a shot (and I don't think his arms were swinging around faster than his body, but it's what the officials saw from the replay), but I understand why it was made. For the past two years, the world's soccer authorities have placed a real emphasis on catching hands/forearms/elbows to areas of the body above the shoulders. Other sports are doing the same thing.
 
cjhawks said:
Cole's foul has been called in many other NCAA games I've watched this season. It's a rule, and something officials have been instructed to watch for. It's a stupid rule, but a rule nonetheless. Regardless if contact was accidental, more often than not the officials will rule a foul. I believe the replay is used to verify the player indeed was contacted in the face or was just a "flop".

I don't know of anyone who likes the rule, but it is being enforced universally it appears.
Click to expand...
cj, you didn't see what you thought you saw on the play where Cole was called for the flagrant foul. His arms were not swinging towards this guy any faster than he was pivoting toward the basket. That's what most people are missing here. He was not swinging his elbows at this guy, he was pivoting. A player can legally pivot with his elbows out just as long as he is not swinging them faster than he is pivoting. If I pivot with my elbows extended and don't swing them, it's probably actually a foul on the defensive player if he doesn't get out of the way. Most refs probably won't call a foul on the defensive player in this situation since the guy's face got a little mashed, but it was his fault.
 
The rule is stupid, and written poorly.

Here is a clip from the rulebook.

When the arm and elbow, with the shoulder as a base (pivot) are swung
with a speed that exceeds the rest of the body as it rotates on the hips or on
the pivot foot, that action is considered to be excessive. Contact, after such
an action, shall not be ignored but shall be called a flagrant foul. When the
player’s arm(s) and elbow(s) are swung excessively but without contact, a
violation has been committed.

The problem with this is that the elbow must alway move faster than the body whenever the body rotates or pivots. The elbow must cover a longer arc than the shoulder, and so it must travel faster to keep things lined up. It is simple physics.
 
In addition to Cole pivoting towards the basket, the defender stepped in also, which added to the collision.
 
sioux34 said:
The rule is stupid, and written poorly.

Here is a clip from the rulebook.

When the arm and elbow, with the shoulder as a base (pivot) are swung
with a speed that exceeds the rest of the body as it rotates on the hips or on
the pivot foot, that action is considered to be excessive. Contact, after such
an action, shall not be ignored but shall be called a flagrant foul. When the
player’s arm(s) and elbow(s) are swung excessively but without contact, a
violation has been committed.

The problem with this is that the elbow must alway move faster than the body whenever the body rotates or pivots. The elbow must cover a longer arc than the shoulder, and so it must travel faster to keep things lined up. It is simple physics.
Click to expand...

If the officials felt that was what happened, by that wording Jarryd should have been whistled for a "flagrant" foul and ejected. That would have been totally inappropriate punishment for what happened.
 
sioux34 said:
The rule is stupid, and written poorly.

Here is a clip from the rulebook.

When the arm and elbow, with the shoulder as a base (pivot) are swung
with a speed that exceeds the rest of the body as it rotates on the hips or on
the pivot foot, that action is considered to be excessive. Contact, after such
an action, shall not be ignored but shall be called a flagrant foul. When the
player’s arm(s) and elbow(s) are swung excessively but without contact, a
violation has been committed.

The problem with this is that the elbow must alway move faster than the body whenever the body rotates or pivots. The elbow must cover a longer arc than the shoulder, and so it must travel faster to keep things lined up. It is simple physics.
Click to expand...
You are absolutely correct! So, the rule's application must be done properly and recognize the difference between a guy that is swinging his elbows and a guy that is just pivoting towards the basket.
 
sioux34 said:
The rule is stupid, and written poorly.

Here is a clip from the rulebook.

When the arm and elbow, with the shoulder as a base (pivot) are swung
with a speed that exceeds the rest of the body as it rotates on the hips or on
the pivot foot, that action is considered to be excessive. Contact, after such
an action, shall not be ignored but shall be called a flagrant foul. When the
player’s arm(s) and elbow(s) are swung excessively but without contact, a
violation has been committed.

The problem with this is that the elbow must alway move faster than the body whenever the body rotates or pivots. The elbow must cover a longer arc than the shoulder, and so it must travel faster to keep things lined up. It is simple physics.
Click to expand...

This rule obviously was written with the intention of preventing (or punishing) a player who has just collected a rebound from swinging their arms/elbows to clear away defenders and make space, or a player who just caught a pass or picked up their dribble from swinging their arms/elbows with the intention of contacting a defender's face.

I think a distinction can be made between that action and a player simply having his arms/elbows up firmly holding the ball in order to shoot a basket.
 
While I agree that is the intention of the rule, it is clearly not how it is being applied.
 
Lets just put it this way, if that foul on Cole was a flagrant foul then ANY elbow to the face should be a flagrant foul. And why wasn't he ejected if it was a flagrant foul like it states in sioux's definition.
 
You guys need to make sure you have the new rule that was added in the spring of 2010. If you make contact, they go to a review and it will be deemed either intentional or flagrant.

Intentional is 2 shots and ball.
Flagrant is 2 shot and ball and player ejected.
 
I am not saying it was or should have been flagrant. I only posted a snippet of the rule that describes the motion, as being faster than the body. I tried to point out that the motion of the elbow will always be faster than the body and therefor the rule is stupid as written.
 
storminspank said:
You guys need to make sure you have the new rule that was added in the spring of 2010. If you make contact, they go to a review and it will be deemed either intentional or flagrant.

Intentional is 2 shots and ball.
Flagrant is 2 shot and ball and player ejected.
Click to expand...

This. The "speed" of rotation referred to in the rule refers to speed of the elbow relative to the rest of othe body. If you watch the play Coles elbows were slightly ahead of his shoulders, which were slightly ahead of his hips, which were slightly ahead of his feet. By definition his elbows were rotating at a faster pace than the rest of his body. Actually it's pretty impossible for that NOT to happen when you turn and pivot with the ball held above you head (try it at home or in your office).

If you guys have any beef it's with the rules commitie. The game officials did nothing more than enforce the rules that govern the college game perfectly in that situation.
 
tweeterhawk said:
This rule obviously was written with the intention of preventing (or punishing) a player who has just collected a rebound from swinging their arms/elbows to clear away defenders and make space, or a player who just caught a pass or picked up their dribble from swinging their arms/elbows with the intention of contacting a defender's face.

I think a distinction can be made between that action and a player simply having his arms/elbows up firmly holding the ball in order to shoot a basket.
Click to expand...

That is example 1a and 1b of why this rule is in place.
 
storminspank said:
You guys need to make sure you have the new rule that was added in the spring of 2010. If you make contact, they go to a review and it will be deemed either intentional or flagrant.

Intentional is 2 shots and ball.
Flagrant is 2 shot and ball and player ejected.
Click to expand...

Well that clears up the flagrant question. So in other word if a guy gets an elbow to the face it is going to be called no matter what(obviously in Cole's case) and it is just a matter if it is flagrant or intentional or not. Then they need to call it something else like "elbow to the face" because that clearly was not intentional.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top