Elbow to Kriener's face

PCHawk said:
He was standing there looking forward then out of nowhere threw his arm up and back hard enough to cut the bridge of his nose. Do you have any reasonable explanation for why he would do that? I agree that his surprised reaction looks real but I just assume it was an act since I can't think of any reason he would need to do that. I've seen a lot of accidents in bang bang plays get called.
Click to expand...

You do realize that as soon as you are going to do ANYTHING, from running to turning to going to set a screen, your first move is going to be to lower your arms or arm. You don’t see guys running around making basketball moves and plays with both arms up. So yeah it makes total sense that as soon as the play was beginning he was then lowering his arm/arms to start running the play that was called or make any kind of basketball move at all.
 
Even with my Hawkeye colored glasses on I can say that should have been a flagerent 1. The kid sold it and acted like that he didn't 'intentionally' do it but as others have said he KNEW and could feel that Kreiner was where he was. He absolutely swung his elbow not only down but backwards from the way he was standing to even do it. It wasn't like Kriener had his face in his arm pit. Maybe you don't give him the F2 and kick him out for it but you sure don't do nothing...
 
For what it's worth, I thought the no-call was appropriate. I think the flagrant stuff gets a bit carried away. I think he was lowering his center of gravity in an attempt to move, and Kriener was right up in his business. I think if you call this one, it is a slippery slope that leads you to calling Bohannon's reach and grab after the late turnover/blocked shot a flagrant. That clearly was not a "basketball play" in that he was making no attempt to play the ball, but when one person tries to rapidly move around another, it very often involves grabbing and pulling, and that happens all the time in basketball. If that one is called flagrant/intentional, it completely changes the complexion of the game.

I think flagrant/intentional should be reserved for when there is obvious malicious intent, and I just don't think it was obvious in the Kriener case.
 
deanvogs said:
You do realize that as soon as you are going to do ANYTHING, from running to turning to going to set a screen, your first move is going to be to lower your arms or arm. You don’t see guys running around making basketball moves and plays with both arms up. So yeah it makes total sense that as soon as the play was beginning he was then lowering his arm/arms to start running the play that was called or make any kind of basketball move at all.
Click to expand...

Wow. One of us needs to watch it again because we see it way different. I agree with the announcer. There is no reason for your arm to go back when the ball is in front of you. If he doesn't act surprised it was a flagorant 2.
 
PCHawk said:
Wow. One of us needs to watch it again because we see it way different. I agree with the announcer. There is no reason for your arm to go back when the ball is in front of you. If he doesn't act surprised it was a flagorant 2.
Click to expand...

Except when you are going to take a step forward with your right leg, your left arm is automatically going to go back. That is how we are wired to control the longitudinal axis rotation generated by our leg swinging forward.

I tried to find the video to see it again, but I couldn't locate it. In the moment, I was torn and could have seen it go either way. I was happy with the no-call because unless it is obviously malicious, I would rather just let them play.
 
To be honest, when I saw the first replay, I thought Kreiner flopped. When they first showed him with the towel over his face I thought he was laughing, but when they pulled it back and you could see the war wound, it was a legit hit. Should have at least been F1.

I think we can all agree we have some tough kids on this team, Kreiner leading that pack.
 
What were people's thoughts on the Bohannon foul at the end being a regular, not an intentional? I thought it was the right call, but did anyone thing we got away with one there? It probably would have been a "clear path" foul in the NBA.
 
I thought it was unintentional until I saw the replay and the more they showed the replay made me think the player knew what he was doing. Good basketball players can feel the presence of a defender on a side of them. He knew Kreiner was there, IMO.
 
CP87 said:
What were people's thoughts on the Bohannon foul at the end being a regular, not an intentional? I thought it was the right call, but did anyone thing we got away with one there? It probably would have been a "clear path" foul in the NBA.
Click to expand...

No, because he didn't just reach out and grab a jersey to hold. He made a swatting attempt even though the ball wasn't there. Whose to say there wasn't a chance the ball would be there to hit.
 
CP87 said:
Except when you are going to take a step forward with your right leg, your left arm is automatically going to go back. That is how we are wired to control the longitudinal axis rotation generated by our leg swinging forward.

I tried to find the video to see it again, but I couldn't locate it. In the moment, I was torn and could have seen it go either way. I was happy with the no-call because unless it is obviously malicious, I would rather just let them play.
Click to expand...

I agree with you on the leg movement, but the way I remember it, the left arm was the only part of his body to move. It is possible I remember it wrong.
 
CP87 said:
What were people's thoughts on the Bohannon foul at the end being a regular, not an intentional? I thought it was the right call, but did anyone thing we got away with one there? It probably would have been a "clear path" foul in the NBA.
Click to expand...

I thought it was going to be a flagorant. My only hope was how quick the grab was.
 
My wife said not flagrant. I said it could go either way. But it was clearly a foul...even if not flagrant...and his 4th. I said the refs should err on the side of flagrant since they blew the call. Glad we won regardless.
 
The big problem is that the refs seem to have no clue and are far from consistent. The announcers are always hesitant to say confidently what the call should be because they have seen enough recent NCAA basketball to know the refs could rule any which way. Bobby Hanson said there is no longer the intentional foul which would clarify why JBO was only hit with a regular foul. But I have not heard any other announcers say the intentional foul is history and I seem to recall a recent game where a player who had an easy dunk of an offensive rebound was grabbed around the waste to prevent the easy 2 and a flagrant 1 was called.
 
SayHawkKid said:
The big problem is that the refs seem to have no clue and are far from consistent. The announcers are always hesitant to say confidently what the call should be because they have seen enough recent NCAA basketball to know the refs could rule any which way. Bobby Hanson said there is no longer the intentional foul which would clarify why JBO was only hit with a regular foul. But I have not heard any other announcers say the intentional foul is history and I seem to recall a recent game where a player who had an easy dunk of an offensive rebound was grabbed around the waste to prevent the easy 2 and a flagrant 1 was called.
Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flagrant_foul

  • A flagrant 1 foul (men's) or unsportsmanlike foul (women's) involves excessive or severe contact during a live ball, including especially when a player "swings an elbow and makes illegal, non-excessive contact with an opponent above the shoulders". This offense includes the former "intentional foul" of fouling an opposing player to prevent an easy breakaway score. In women's basketball only, the unsportsmanlike foul also includes contact dead-ball technical fouls. The penalty for a flagrant 1 or unsportsmanlike foul is two free throws and a throw-in for the opposing team at the out-of-bounds spot nearest the foul.
 
JG10Hawk said:
Flagrant or not, am I the only one that thought Kriener kind of baited him into and sold it a bit? I mean he walked right into the dudes space when his arms were up and then flopped around like he's done in the past after the blow hit.
Click to expand...
Sorry but it's not selling when you're bleeding
 
Ree4 said:
Sorry but it's not selling when you're bleeding
Click to expand...

What does selling it and bleeding have to do with one another? Obviously he got hit, I was never disputing that. I'm just saying he baited the Rutgers dude into it by getting that close and then sold it ie drew attention to it by flailing his arms around like he's done in the past after the elbow hit. I wasn't saying he was flopping or didn't get hit. Flopping and selling it are completely different.
 
JG10Hawk said:
Maybe we are just splitting hairs but to me flopping is when a player completely makes up the contact while selling can happen whether there is contact or not.
Click to expand...
Look, we both know he didn't flop. I don't think he "sold" it at all because he was bleeding from an elbow to his nose. He bent over and clutched at it like any person would, if he flailed his arms then I feel it was justified.
 
Ree4 said:
Look, we both know he didn't flop. I don't think he "sold" it at all because he was bleeding from an elbow to his nose. He bent over and clutched at it like any person would, if he flailed his arms then I feel it was justified.
Click to expand...

Ok I went back and looked, you are right, he did not flail his arms, my bad. Maybe my mind went straight to his major flop he had a few weeks back and just couldn't get that out of my head after seeing him grinning with the towel over his nose.:oops:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top