Duke Blue Devils (that rat faced scumbag)

[OSU_Buckguy]

Not a cheap shot, didn't even warrant the ejection and suspension IMO. He was going for a block, adjusting for the loose ball when the contact occurred. Most accounts I've read seem to agree...

as i've stated before, intent is immaterial as to flagrancy. per ejection, it didn't matter if the foul was a cheap shot or intentional. causing excessive harm or committing a severe foul is sufficient enough for a flagrant foul to be called. there is absolutely no doubt that a flagrant foul was the correct call. any official who knows the rules would agree. the situation (end of game, game out of reach, foul on top of a foul, ball already out of player's hands, foul with elbow/forearm and not hand, profuse bleeding, etc.) required that a flagrant foul was to be called. when there is a flagrant foul called, the player must be ejected.

 

[jimotis4heisman]

what i know. henderson showed up with bad intentions. he wasnt going in there to block the shot but send a message. its no different than a guy who goes to the rim with bad intentions leading with his elbow. he had bad intentions, period.

what i saw. henderson never had his thumb above his head, right before he goes to jump tyler loses the ball as that other white swing man is all over him, henderson jumps never extending his arm to block anything and lead with his elbow looking for contact. he then stands there as he lands, not attempting the ball, stands there then walks away and looks guilty.

what i think. hendersons had bad intentions, the way he lunges into the "block" the fact he doesnt play the ball with two hands, the fact he never extends his arm, the way he leads with his elbow. to me all that adds up to punch/elbow in an attempt to injure.

other stuff i heard on the radio this am "since 200x duke has had 9 players ejected."

if i was coach k. henderson is done for the acc tourney. thats just my view, but doubt that happens.

the coaches handling it in game. williams and k both did a very good job of handling the situation in game. i give them both credit for that.

 

[OSU_Buckguy]

I hear what you are saying, but there have been many times when players have been hit in the nose harder than that with elbows and there has been no blood...I think the blood made the situation look worse than what it was...

i think the amount of the blood was representative of the severity of the blow.

again, see my previous post in regard to flagrant versus intentional fouls. while there have been several instances of bleeding as a result of lesser blows, henderson's action was as severe as i've seen in a while--in college basketball, that is--for a foul that might or might not have been intentional.

 

[coastalbuck]

he must suck pretty badly at blocking shots then. his hand wasn't close to the ball. nobody blocks a shot with their arm at a 90 degree angle.

He was looking at the ball and trying to swat at it while trying to come down on two feet.

as i've stated before, intent is immaterial as to flagrancy. per ejection, it didn't matter if the foul was a cheap shot or intentional. causing excessive harm or committing a severe foul is sufficient enough for a flagrant foul to be called. there is absolutely no doubt that a flagrant foul was the correct call. any official who knows the rules would agree. the situation (end of game, game out of reach, foul on top of a foul, ball already out of player's hands, foul with elbow/forearm and not hand, profuse bleeding, etc.) required that a flagrant foul was to be called. when there is a flagrant foul called, the player must be ejected.

If I have time, I might try to read the rule to get more understanding. Seems to me to be more like a high foul from behind on a layup, intentional yes, no ejection though. I really need to look at the rule. :)

 

[buckeyeboy]

henderson never had his thumb above his head, right before he goes to jump tyler loses the ball as that other white swing man is all over him, henderson jumps never extending his arm to block anything and lead with his elbow looking for contact.

Agreed. No one goes up for a rebound by making a doward motion with their forearm, like Henderson did. And please don't tell me that he was adjusting to the play. If he were that good at controlling his body, he could've kept from smashing his forearm into Hansbrough's face when the ball wasn't even in the picture anymore.

 

[OSU_Buckguy]

what i know. henderson showed up with bad intentions. he wasnt going in there to block the shot but send a message. its no different than a guy who goes to the rim with bad intentions leading with his elbow. he had bad intentions, period.

what i saw. henderson never had his thumb above his head, right before he goes to jump tyler loses the ball as that other white swing man is all over him, henderson jumps never extending his arm to block anything and lead with his elbow looking for contact. he then stands there as he lands, not attempting the ball, stands there then walks away and looks guilty.

what i think. hendersons had bad intentions, the way he lunges into the "block" the fact he doesnt play the ball with two hands, the fact he never extends his arm, the way he leads with his elbow. to me all that adds up to punch/elbow in an attempt to injure.

agreed. all good points. also, if henderson didn't intend to hurt hansbrough, why didn't he go over to hansbrough right away to see if he was okay? hansbrough was on the ground for a good 5 or so seconds before getting up.

 

[Folanator]

They should have let Henderson stay in the game. I was always pissed when the other team had someone ejected for a dirty play. No chance to hurt him.

 

[OSU_Buckguy]

If I have time, I might try to read the rule to get more understanding. Seems to me to be more like a high foul from behind on a layup, intentional yes, no ejection though. I really need to look at the rule.

feel free. you'll find that if a foul is excessive, or excessive enough, the foul may be considered flagrant (whether or not the foul was intentional). the player committing the flagrant foul must then be ejected from the game. the difference between the decision to suspend henderson from playing in the following game and not suspending henderson is that the officials deemed that henderson intended to commit a hard foul.

 

[jimotis4heisman]

He was looking at the ball and trying to swat at it while trying to come down on two feet.



If I have time, I might try to read the rule to get more understanding. Seems to me to be more like a high foul from behind on a layup, intentional yes, no ejection though. I really need to look at the rule. :)

i believe it fell under "confrontational and/or combative action"

you can download the rulebook in pdf and search it easily that way.

 

[jimotis4heisman]

agreed. all good points. also, if henderson didn't intend to hurt hansbrough, why didn't he go over to hansbrough right away to see if he was okay? hansbrough was on the ground for a good 5 or so seconds before getting up.

i dont know if he intended to "hurt" tyler, though gerald showed up with bad intentions no questions asked. imo.

 

[BB73]

duke was down by only 12 with 1:40 to go. when there was a minute to go, williams had hansborough's sub in at the table. there was no break until the free throws, which were being shot by hansbrough. though roy should have called a timeout to take out his key player(s), hansbrough's presence didn't warrant the hard foul.

I'm pretty sure that Duke was down 16 when they hit a three with about 50 seconds left, and called timeout down by 13. I questioned Coach K calling that one at the time, he should have just let the clock run. And Roy Williams easily could have taken Hansbrough out at that point. The intensity of the rivalry is part of why Duke called the TO and why NC still had their star in the game.

Also, Duke should have boxed out Hansbrough on his own free throw - the hard foul happened after he missed a free throw and then got his own rebound close to the basket. If Duke wanted to 'play hard' in the last 20 seconds to not get further embarrassed, they should have boxed out the shooter and rebounded the free throw.

Henderson had the intent of a hard foul, but I can't say that he wanted to elbow Hansbrough in the face. Regardless, the flagrant foul and the ejection were good calls by the refs, but I didn't understand why it took them several minutes to make the call (I was watching live).

Gottfried (on ESPN last night) compared it to an incident a couple of years ago, where the player was suspended from the next game (as Henderson will be), and also suspended the next time the two teams met. Suspending Henderson from the next Duke-NC game (even sometime next year) isn't a bad idea.

 

[OSU_Buckguy]

i dont know if he intended to "hurt" tyler, though gerald showed up with bad intentions no questions asked. imo.

showing up with bad intentions rarely means that the player doesn't intend to hurt someone. i doubt henderson intended to cause that much pain, but i bet he wanted to his foul to sting at least.

 

[jimotis4heisman]

showing up with bad intentions rarely means that the player doesn't intend to hurt someone. i doubt henderson intended to cause that much pain, but i bet he wanted to his foul to sting at least.

thats what im saying...

i dont know that gerald henderson had an intent to injure, but i know he wasnt going in there just to get the ball (thus showing up with bad intentions)

 

[coastalbuck]

Section 17. Fighting
Art. 1. Fighting, as defined in Rule 4-23, includes, but is not limited to:
a. An attempt to strike an opponent with the arms, hands, legs or feet.
b. An attempt to punch or kick an opponent, regardless of whether
contact is made.
c. An attempt to instigate a fight by committing an unsportsmanlike
act toward an opponent that causes the opponent to retaliate by
fighting.
As determined by the officials, fighting is a flagrant foul and can be either
personal (during a live ball) or technical (during a dead ball).

After looking at the rulebook, the officials correctly called a flagrant T on him and based on the def. of fighting, called for the ejection and suspension. That was their opinion, it wouldn't have been mine. But, it is reasonable.

Art. 8. After a game, conference offices or the assigning authority may
correct an error in who was involved in a fight but cannot change an
official?s ruling that a fight took place or lessen the severity of the penalty.

Not much wriggle room to change either, as Coach K mentioned he'd like them to take a look at it.

 

[OSU_Buckguy]

I'm pretty sure that Duke was down 16 when they hit a three with about 50 seconds left, and called timeout down by 13. I questioned Coach K calling that one at the time, he should have just let the clock run. And Roy Williams easily could have taken Hansbrough out at that point. The intensity of the rivalry is part of why Duke called the TO and why NC still had their star in the game.

Also, Duke should have boxed out Hansbrough on his own free throw - the hard foul happened after he missed a free throw and then got his own rebound close to the basket. If Duke wanted to 'play hard' in the last 20 seconds to not get further embarrassed, they should have boxed out the shooter and rebounded the free throw.

yes, i realized that when watching espn just a bit ago, too. when i posted the reference to the time, i was going off what williams stated in the press conference. however, i wouldn't be at all surprised to find out that williams did have a sub ready for hansbrough but chose to rescind the substitution when coach k called timeout and kept his key players in.