03-11-2012, 05:33 AM
I don't know that The School near Oakland will get a #7 seed. But I can hope they get a #10 seed, and then beat a #2. But even if they wind up playing a #1 seed, I think they could give them a tough time.
I wish GameTracker was following the games in the tourney as they seem to get the official play-by-play live. ESPN had some errors, IIRC.
An interesting stat that was mentioned on TV: Stanford had 11 straight rebounds to start the second half. Later, K.al got 6 in a row.
I notice we didn't see Melissa Barlow as a ref.Â
Flagrant fouls don't have to be intentional. And "intentional" is no longer part of the wording of the rules. ("Flagrant 1 foul" has replaced "intentional personal foul")
From 2012 & 2013 NCAA Men's and Women's Basketball Rules
http://www.ncaapublications.com/productd...s/BR13.pdf
As I read those, if you swing your elbows and make illegal contact above the shoulders, it is a flagrant foul. If you do not swing your elbows and your elbow makes illegal, not incidental, contact above the shoulders, then the foul would normally be a common foul unless the effect is excessive or severe (or confrontational).
The foul at 18:59 in the first half against Gray should have been called flagrant 2 foul, IMO, because it was excessive, not just a flagrant 1 foul. She swung both elbows upwards at the face in what would be a one-two punch by a boxer, with the intent to strike the opponent. (The left elbow swing is seen in the replay and the right elbow swing is seen during regular play) Judging from the fact that this was just 1 minute into the game, I suspect this was premeditated, and could have, maybe should have, been ruled confrontational.
When Nneka's contact lens was dislodged at 18:50 in the 2nd half, it was because of Gray's right hand swiping her face during a rebound. Nothing excessive there, but could have been called a foul.
When Nneka got hit in the face again at 10:29 in the 2nd half, it was from the shooter's non-shooting hand coming down into her face. Again nothing excessive. A charging foul was called, separately from the hand to the face. I thought the blocking foul they called a few seconds later should also have been a charging foul. Nneka was clearly in place before the player left the ground. But perhaps Nneka's right foot was on the restricted area circle, in which case it is to be called a blocking foul.
The foul called on Chiney at 10:05 in the 2nd was apparently ruled a flagrant 1 foul. Chiney was guarding one player and went for a rebound. Another player behind her, whom Chiney never saw, was hit in the face by Chiney's forearm. (Not that it matters, but it wasn't either "running into an elbow" or "throwing an elbow") I'm not sure what the refs were thinking here. I believe that the camera angle from behind the players (the live shot) shows the contact was with the forearm, not the elbow. But even if the refs felt it was the elbow, rule 4-26.14 seems to indicate that without swinging the elbows, it is a common foul, unless it is an excessive or unnecessary foul. It was clearly not swinging the elbows, nor excessive.
The foul by Caldwell against Nneka at 6:36 in the 2nd was similar to the Chiney foul at 10:05. The offending player (on offense) was moving her arm, calling for the ball, and brought her arm down with the elbow hitting Nneka's cheek. This time, there was no review, and no flagrant 1 foul call. I don't see the difference.
While I'm at it, the foul on Jos just before the half might be legit. Jos clearly had position two foot falls before the contact. The TV camera angle doesn't allow me to tell if Jos's feet were spread too far, but it looks like it may be. They are supposed to be at shoulder width. I've rarely seen that called (ie, most of the time, the feet are wider than the shoulders). For instance, see the screen being set at 11:12 in the 1st.
I wish GameTracker was following the games in the tourney as they seem to get the official play-by-play live. ESPN had some errors, IIRC.
An interesting stat that was mentioned on TV: Stanford had 11 straight rebounds to start the second half. Later, K.al got 6 in a row.
I notice we didn't see Melissa Barlow as a ref.Â
Flagrant fouls don't have to be intentional. And "intentional" is no longer part of the wording of the rules. ("Flagrant 1 foul" has replaced "intentional personal foul")
From 2012 & 2013 NCAA Men's and Women's Basketball Rules
http://www.ncaapublications.com/productd...s/BR13.pdf
Quote:[4-29.2] c. Flagrant 1 personal foul. A flagrant 1 personal foul shall be a personal
foul that is deemed excessive in nature and/or unnecessary, but not based
solely on the severity of the act. Examples include, but are not limited to:
...[omitting examples 1 through 5]
6. Illegal contact with an elbow that occurs above the shoulders of an
opponent when the elbows are not swung excessively per 4-36.7.a.
[4-29.2] d. Flagrant 2 personal foul. A flagrant 2 personal foul shall be a personal
foul that involves contact with an opponent that is not only excessive, but
also severe or extreme while the ball is live.
 ...
[4-29.3] f. Flagrant 2 technical foul. A flagrant 2 technical foul can be either contact
or noncontact.
1. A flagrant 2 contact technical foul occurs when the ball is dead and the
contact is not only excessive, but also severe or extreme.
a. An exception may be a foul committed by an airborne shooter.
2. A flagrant 2 noncontact technical foul occurs when the ball is either
live or dead and involves extreme, sometimes persistent, vulgar,
abusive conduct.
[4-29.3] g. Contact dead ball technical foul. A contact dead ball technical foul
occurs when the ball is dead and involves contact that is unnecessary,
unacceptable and excessive, but does not rise to the level of a flagrant 2
contact technical foul.
Quote:[4-26] Art. 7. When during the course of play (live ball), an individual strikes anThis weekend, there was a contact dead ball technical foul called for Baylor's Destiny Williams (while standing) pulling the pony tail of a player lying on the floor.Â
opponent with the hand, elbow, arm, foot, knee or leg in a nonconfrontational
manner but the act is excessive or severe, it shall be ruled as a flagrant 2 personal
foul and not a fighting action. When a defined body part is used to strike an
opponent but the contact is not severe or excessive, a judgment shall be made by
the official as to whether the contact is a flagrant 1 personal foul.
...
[4-26] Art. 13. Illegal contact caused by the swinging of the elbow(s) that:
a. Results from total body movement is a common or flagrant 1 personal foul
b. Is excessive per Rule 4-36.7 is a flagrant 2 foul.
c. Occurs above the shoulders of an opponent is a flagrant 1 or flagrant 2
personal foul.
d. Occurs below the shoulders of an opponent is a common, flagrant 1 or
flagrant 2 personal foul.
[4-26] Art. 14. Illegal contact with an elbow that does not involve the swinging of the
elbow shall be considered a foul unless the contact is incidental per Rule 4-40.
[4-36] Art. 7. The following shall be considered excessive swinging:
a. When arm(s) and elbow(s) are swung about while using the shoulders as
pivots, and the speed of the extended arm(s) and elbow(s) exceeds that of
the rest of the body as it rotates on the hips or on the pivot foot; or
b. When the speed and vigor with which the arm(s) and elbow(s) are swung
is such that injury could result if another player were contacted.
As I read those, if you swing your elbows and make illegal contact above the shoulders, it is a flagrant foul. If you do not swing your elbows and your elbow makes illegal, not incidental, contact above the shoulders, then the foul would normally be a common foul unless the effect is excessive or severe (or confrontational).
The foul at 18:59 in the first half against Gray should have been called flagrant 2 foul, IMO, because it was excessive, not just a flagrant 1 foul. She swung both elbows upwards at the face in what would be a one-two punch by a boxer, with the intent to strike the opponent. (The left elbow swing is seen in the replay and the right elbow swing is seen during regular play) Judging from the fact that this was just 1 minute into the game, I suspect this was premeditated, and could have, maybe should have, been ruled confrontational.
When Nneka's contact lens was dislodged at 18:50 in the 2nd half, it was because of Gray's right hand swiping her face during a rebound. Nothing excessive there, but could have been called a foul.
When Nneka got hit in the face again at 10:29 in the 2nd half, it was from the shooter's non-shooting hand coming down into her face. Again nothing excessive. A charging foul was called, separately from the hand to the face. I thought the blocking foul they called a few seconds later should also have been a charging foul. Nneka was clearly in place before the player left the ground. But perhaps Nneka's right foot was on the restricted area circle, in which case it is to be called a blocking foul.
The foul called on Chiney at 10:05 in the 2nd was apparently ruled a flagrant 1 foul. Chiney was guarding one player and went for a rebound. Another player behind her, whom Chiney never saw, was hit in the face by Chiney's forearm. (Not that it matters, but it wasn't either "running into an elbow" or "throwing an elbow") I'm not sure what the refs were thinking here. I believe that the camera angle from behind the players (the live shot) shows the contact was with the forearm, not the elbow. But even if the refs felt it was the elbow, rule 4-26.14 seems to indicate that without swinging the elbows, it is a common foul, unless it is an excessive or unnecessary foul. It was clearly not swinging the elbows, nor excessive.
The foul by Caldwell against Nneka at 6:36 in the 2nd was similar to the Chiney foul at 10:05. The offending player (on offense) was moving her arm, calling for the ball, and brought her arm down with the elbow hitting Nneka's cheek. This time, there was no review, and no flagrant 1 foul call. I don't see the difference.
While I'm at it, the foul on Jos just before the half might be legit. Jos clearly had position two foot falls before the contact. The TV camera angle doesn't allow me to tell if Jos's feet were spread too far, but it looks like it may be. They are supposed to be at shoulder width. I've rarely seen that called (ie, most of the time, the feet are wider than the shoulders). For instance, see the screen being set at 11:12 in the 1st.