Question about hte flagrant foul review

[pbiflyer]

So, because of a break in the action, the refs were able to go back and review the Lockett play, even though it had happened several seconds before the whistle. Can they do that?
If so, what else can they review and overturn? It just seemed strange to call a foul on a play that happened earlier in the game.

[kneelb4zerg]

I think that if a coach requests it, saying that he thinks his player got hit in the face by an elbow, the refs have to stop action to review the video. It seems insane to me but that's how it works.

[IWB]

As many times as that has happened this year, and each time the announcers ripping the rule, no way the NCAA continues. There has to be some sort of intent. Last night the Butler player was within inches of Lockett and he was simply moving the ball to the other side. No intent at all. Not to mention the contact by the Butler player should have been a foul first.

[MUMac]

Yeah, as usual, the rules makers do not think a rule through before implementing it. Really a dumb rule and could, in fact, lead to more contact as defenses try to take advantage of it and get in the players space.

[IWB]

Exactly Mac, when they called that one on Lockett, I said if that is the rule I would stick my chin out every single play and try to get hit.

Of course my chin wouldn't get very far out because my gut would be out there further, but worth the try.

[Westcoastwarrior]

I was listening to Sirius Radio coverage of a different game...and they discussed the Flagerant 1 & 2.

They described it similar to the "red flag" in football. After play is stopped, the coach can request a review of elbow contact during play. If no flagrant is determined...then a full time out is assessed to the team that called for the review.

Because of this rule....a lot of coaches have instructed their players to let them know if they got an elbow to the head during a play during a break in action... then the coach can approach the head official for an review.

That is why the officials reviewed the play after the game had stopped....Brad Steven requested it.

[Nukem2]

Seems that most of the flagrant calls were the result of the offender being fouled in the first place with, as IWB points out, no intent to harm. I guess te concern for safety has become paramount; but, concern for whose safety. If a guy is mugging another player and gets an elbow, I would suggest ( upon review ) that he be charged for his foul in conjunction with the flagrant call and then invoke the alternate possession arrow ( unless its truly intentional and then possession goes to offended team ). The reason for flagrant fouls is more to eliminate intentional violent elbows or punches. Things seem backwards now.

[Goose85]

I hope they fix the rule before next season. There should be some kind of space issue or like IWB said call it a double foul after review.

So if I'm going down the lane for a layup, and a defender is chasing from behind and tries reaching around me, and my arm goes backward and elbow hits a defender I didn't know was even there, is it still a flagrant foul?

Elbows to the head are a bad thing, but sometimes I think that is the chance trapping defenders take when they are bodying up an offensive player.