Duke Blue Devils (that rat faced scumbag)

[crazybuckfan40]

a player who commits a flagrant foul must be immediately ejected from the court. as i've stated a couple times before, intent is immaterial as to flagrancy. an excessive, harsh foul is reason enough for it to be considered flagrant. even though henderson might not have intended to harm another player, he exhibited disregard for the other players. he committed a foul on top of another player's foul. he leaped into a crowd without control. he never made contact with the ball. the arm that would have been used to rebound the ball or block a shot was never outstretched. he instead led with his elbow and forearm. finally, he happened to apply enough force with his elbow and forearm to hansbrough's face as to draw a lot of blood and break his nose. all the while, he did this when his team was down by a lot of points with very little time left. whether hansbrough was going to dunk the ball has no bearing on whether henderson's foul was flagrant.

again, even if intent is not considered, there is no question that henderson committed a flagrant foul. as such, he had to be ejected. there is no fuzzy area there. it does not matter when during a game a flagrant foul is committed. for a player to be ejected only under certain time conditions sends a very bad message to the players.

I never knew that a player was to be ejected after a flagrant foul...If so why did the refs have to go to the monitor at all?

 

[Jeffcat]

No offense, but your logic here is horrible. You assume what is bolded above, despite the facts that (1) what is bolded above is an opinion, not a fact and (2) not only is it an opinion, but you are in the vast minority of those that hold that opinion. Put another way, you base your entire argument on an opinion that very few people (if anyone, besides you) hold. Let me put it this way: you are about the only one in this thread (besides coastalbuck, maybe) who thinks the foul was merely an accident and therefore not flagrant. What does that tell you?

fine if you want me to go into complete detail then sure i will and it is an opinion just as much as yours except from what i see in the tape it resoundingly supports my opinion that he did not try to hurt hansbrough. whether or not the foul was intentionally hard is disputable but i dont think it was meant to be that either. i hate the dookies but i draw a fine line between jumping on the bandwagon against henderson just because he plays for duke as opposed to evaluating the video and the tape. my god even the announcer made the situation clear right after the play and pretty much voiced the same concerns as mine as far as getting the game over with instead of letting the crowd rowdier than they already were. i guess the next time there is ever an accident on the basketball court that causes blood from now on we should immediately eject and suspend players on all levels just because we assume they did it on purpose.:!

 

[OSU_Buckguy]

I never knew that a player was to be ejected after a flagrant foul...

it is the case. flagrant fouls are rarely called, though. in fact, after doing a quick search, i found out that earlier this season there was a player who committed a flagrant foul on hansbrough and was ejected as a result. feel free to consult the rules if you don't believe me.

If so why did the refs have to go to the monitor at all?

because the penalty is so stiff, i'm sure they just wanted to make sure the penalty was warranted.

 

[BB73]

I never knew that a player was to be ejected after a flagrant foul...If so why did the refs have to go to the monitor at all?

Definition of a flagrant personal foul, from the NCAA rulebook, Rule 4, Section 26, article 4:

"A flagrant personal foul shall be a personal foul that involves severe or excessive contact with an opponent or involves contact that is extreme in nature when the ball is live."

This differs from an "Intentional foul", which is "not a legitimate attempt to directly play the ball or a player".

Also from the NCAA rulebook, regarding ejections, Rule 4, Section 20, article 2:

The following shall result in automatic ejection:

a. Committing a flagrant personal foul or flagrant technical foul
b. Incurring the maximum combination of technical fouls
c. Participating in a fight
d. Leaving the bench area during a fight situation as bench personnel but not participating in the fight
e. Participating after having been disqualified for a reason other than ejection, or
f. Participating after changing one's uniform number without reporting the change to the scorers and an official

So, in summary, the refs called a flagrant foul because they determined the foul to be 'severe or excessive contact'. Intent did not need to be factored into that determination.

Once the flagrant foul was called, Henderson was automatically ejected.

I am still unaware of the rule(s) which would cause Henderson to be automatically suspended for the next game. I believe that the rule exists, I just haven't been able to find it.

 

[buckeyeboy]

my god even the announcer made the situation clear right after the play and pretty much voiced the same concerns as mine as far as getting the game over with instead of letting the crowd rowdier than they already were.

The game announcer you refer to was Billy Packer. Apparently you don't watch enough college basketball to realize that having the same opinion as that guy, if anything, hurts your case.

i guess the next time there is ever an accident on the basketball court that causes blood from now on we should immediately eject and suspend players on all levels just because we assume they did it on purpose.

Enough with the hyperbole already. This is just as bad as your ridiculous analogy regarding Troy Smith stiffarming a scUM player. At this point, your posts are sounding less and less intelligent.

 

[BuckeyeNation27]

the same one that you supposedly saw considering i watched the whole game. as soon as the foul happened i the first thing i thought about was a whole crying fest over the foul.

if you think that he was going for the block then you didn't see a good replay.

 

[Best Buckeye]

the one I saw on the replay was a better elbow than a lot of ones Ive seen on WWF

 

[coastalbuck]

OK. A flagrant foul requires automatic ejection, and since it is flagrant, it falls under fighting, I posted that earlier. That is the suspension. None the less. The flagrant call is the officials OPINION, not fact. An opinion is never a fact unless by accident. That being said, the officials were correct in calling their opinion of the play. Additionally, the call can't be changed or reviewed unless the people in the fight were incorrectly named or the league wants to make the penalty more severe, again not argument. My OPINION is that it was not flagrant. I have no dogs in this fight, I've listened to both coaches speak at clinics and have much respect for each. Didn't attend, but have visited both schools. Enjoyed both. I hope it wasn't flagrant or intentional, if it was, and admitted, he would not be playing many minutes for Duke for a long, long time.

 

[bucknut11]

I am still unaware of the rule(s) which would cause Henderson to be automatically suspended for the next game. I believe that the rule exists, I just haven't been able to find it.

ACC rule, perhaps?

 

[zincfinger]

here's a random question not directed at anybody.....if it's such a horrible thing that UNC had their best players in at the end of the game, why does dook get to have their best players in?

Because Hansbrough's a jerk who deserves to receive a fully wound-up elbow in the face.

At least I think that's the reasoning.

 

[jimotis4heisman]

ACC rule, perhaps?

ncaa rule.

 

[jimotis4heisman]

as pointed out by costal in post #209

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.

....


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.

 

[crazybuckfan40]

it is the case. flagrant fouls are rarely called, though. in fact, after doing a quick search, i found out that earlier this season there was a player who committed a flagrant foul on hansbrough and was ejected as a result. feel free to consult the rules if you don't believe me.

because the penalty is so stiff, i'm sure they just wanted to make sure the penalty was warranted.

Ok I was just unclear on the rules...

I guess all in all the call was warranted and the ejection and suspension as well due to the rule...

The only thing I don't agree with is that is initial intent was for his elbow to hit him in the face...That happened after the ball was stripped and the Henderson and Hansbrough adjusted their motions due to the strip...

 

[jimotis4heisman]

Ok I was just unclear on the rules...

I guess all in all the call was warranted and the ejection and suspension as well due to the rule...

The only thing I don't agree with is that is initial intent was for his elbow to hit him in the face...That happened after the ball was stripped and the Henderson and Hansbrough adjusted their motions due to the strip...

henderson showed up with bad intentions.

i know ive done the same thing. ive stated before 99 times out of 100 it doesnt end up like this and youd never hear it talked about. henderson was sending a message. watch the video a again 40. watch the way he steps up. watch his body postioning. watch the elbow, the angle, watch the shape that the hand makes, watch which part he leads with (elbow), watch the realtime reaction, watch him walk away, watch as they pan to him on the sideline. watch, watch, watch. (preferably something of decent video quality)

 

[Jeffcat]

The game announcer you refer to was Billy Packer. Apparently you don't watch enough college basketball to realize that having the same opinion as that guy, if anything, hurts your case.



Enough with the hyperbole already. This is just as bad as your ridiculous analogy regarding Troy Smith stiffarming a scUM player. At this point, your posts are sounding less and less intelligent.

i really could care less who the announcer is. thats besides the point. the point is he made the obvious call right from the get go from what he saw on the court in person and from the replay and was standing behind it just as i am. it could be adolf hitler for all i care the guys observations were spot on and i dont see how his observations are disputable in this particular case. if you want my side of the story all you have to do replay the tape and listen to him and try to tell me he is wrong in his observations.
it is a hyperbole.....just like this whole situation has become. i can agree the troy smith analogy isnt the best but i had to use something relevant to hit home. and my posts are sounding less and less intelligent because why?.....because im debating against your opinion?.....oh ok