Online Now 3106

MSU Red Cedar Message Board

The largest and most active MSU Spartans board on the web

On this Board 2281
Record: 12118 (3/18/2012)

Online now 2876
Record: 10351 (3/11/2012)

Boards ▾

MSU Red Cedar Message Board

The largest and most active MSU Spartans board on the web

The Press Box

The place to ask questions to SpartanTailgate's recruiting experts

Duffy Daugherty Forum

"The Duff" is dedicated to Michigan State football recruiting discussion

Jack Breslin Forum

"The Bres" is dedicated to Michigan State basketball recruiting discussion

Wells Hall Off Topic Board

This is your pulpit to preach to the masses about everything from politics to religion

Marketplace & Ticket Exchange

The place to buy, trade or sell Michigan State tickets

Fantasy Sports Forum

For fantasy football and other fantasy sports discussion

Test/Feedback Forum

Reply

Calls that are worse than the flagrant called on Acy...

  • MR. Universe said...

    Im kind of on the edge with this one. Definitely not one of the worst calls of all time

    That's just it. You can at least argue why it was called like it was. I agree - definitely not one of the worst calls of all time, as the OP would have you believe.

    SpartyOn82

  • SpartyOn82 said...

    That's just it. You can at least argue why it was called like it was. I agree - definitely not one of the worst calls of all time, as the OP would have you believe.

    same here. The fact is the "flagrant 1" call is way too open to interpretation. If the played fouled comes down hard it's going to be often called as a flagrant 1. I really hate these calls, especially the contact above the neck - a guy accidentally catches a player with an elbow on a rebound, or comes through on a block and catches a guy and it's suddenly a flagrant 1?

    That said, there is plenty of justification for calling it a flagrant 1 considering how hard Acy hacked Jones.

    And besides, do you really think the game changed on that call? The only way Baylor was winning that games was if Kentucky went to the wrong arena.

    This post was edited by Enrico Palazzo on 3/26/2012 at 8:18 AM

    "If you have the right to be offended I have the right to offend you." - Ricky Gervais

    Enrico Palazzo

  • You seem mad Bro.

    How much coin did you lose on Baylor?

    NigeaCarter ●

  • SpartyOn82 said...

    After looking at the replay, Acy drives his left shoulder into the back of the breakaway player. Yeah, he makes a play on the ball, but he also drives his shoulder into the other players back. "Flagrant 1" has taken the place of "intentional foul", only because of verbage. The NCAA felt since they could not determine intent without being mind readers, they simply changed the name. Having said that, from the rule book, here is the definition of "intentional foul" (now, Flagrant 1): An intentional foul shall be a personal foul that, on the basis of the officials observation of the act, may be purposeful or reactionary and is not based solely on the severity of the act. Examples include, but are not limited to: 1. Causing excessive, non-flagrant contact with an opponent while playing the ball; 2.......5

    This is a direct quote from the rule book found here: http://www.wbca.org/includes/media/docs/2010-11WBBPlayRulesHandbook.pdf Look at the bottom of page 71.

    Having read this, I believe the call is correct and follows #1 listed above. I think it was excessive and non-flagrant, and deserving of the "flagrant 1" that was called.

    I agree with this. Though Acy was able to make a play on the ball, it was still very dangerous because his angle and momentum meant that Jones was going to go crashing wildly (and he did). It's like rear-ending someone into an intersection.

    I have absolutely no problem with this application of the rule.

    tRCMB's Top 5 Worst Posters Power Rankings: #1 Nucky, #2 The Doctor, #3 Brodson, #4 Ghost, #5 Blanch

    Vim ●

  • SpartyOn82 said...

    After looking at the replay, Acy drives his left shoulder into the back of the breakaway player. Yeah, he makes a play on the ball, but he also drives his shoulder into the other players back. "Flagrant 1" has taken the place of "intentional foul", only because of verbage. The NCAA felt since they could not determine intent without being mind readers, they simply changed the name. Having said that, from the rule book, here is the definition of "intentional foul" (now, Flagrant 1): An intentional foul shall be a personal foul that, on the basis of the officials observation of the act, may be purposeful or reactionary and is not based solely on the severity of the act. Examples include, but are not limited to: 1. Causing excessive, non-flagrant contact with an opponent while playing the ball; 2.......5

    This is a direct quote from the rule book found here: http://www.wbca.org/includes/media/docs/2010-11WBBPlayRulesHandbook.pdf Look at the bottom of page 71.

    Having read this, I believe the call is correct and follows #1 listed above. I think it was excessive and non-flagrant, and deserving of the "flagrant 1" that was called.

    Drives his shoulder in the players back? Seriously? You consider that "driving" his shoulder?

    He simply ran hard, made a play on the ball, and their bodies made contact. Look at the replay in the post below yours. Go to the 1 minute mark of the replay and explain how you consider that "driving" his shoulder. He didn't even lower it at all.

    Now, do I really think it was the worst of all time? Probably not. I was using some exaggeration in the original post. But because they were able to look at the replay and then still decide it was a flagrant, it was certainly up there with many others as one of the worst.

    Ringer23

  • Ringer23 said...

    Drives his shoulder in the players back? Seriously? You consider that "driving" his shoulder?

    He simply ran hard, made a play on the ball, and their bodies made contact. Look at the replay in the post below yours. Go to the 1 minute mark of the replay and explain how you consider that "driving" his shoulder. He didn't even lower it at all.

    Now, do I really think it was the worst of all time? Probably not. I was using some exaggeration in the original post. But because they were able to look at the replay and then still decide it was a flagrant, it was certainly up there with many others as one of the worst.

    I don't think it matters if he "lowered" his shoulder or not, as you say. He basically made cantact with the ball while running him over from behind. i called it "driving his shoulder", but maybe I should've said "ran through him" or something like. Euither way, as one poster said, it's open to a large interpretation, and I think the definition fit's the call.

    SpartyOn82

  • I will agree with this argument. If the initial call was a flagrant with no replay it would have been just as bad as Joyce's blown call. However, there is no way Jim Joyce would have not made a call in that situation, looked at the replay and then called him safe.

    Its hard to fathom that these jokers actually didn't make a call, went to the monitor and somehow came up with a Flagrant 1 on that. When a call is that awful you actually start to openly question if the refs have money on the game.

    Posting member of tRCMB since 1997. It is ALWAYS a great day to be a Spartan!!!!

    Raytooth Morgan

Michigan State
247Sports
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports