The knee to Groves' head

[steverocks35]

I can't fathom how a cognitively intact person could watch a replay of that play and say he wasn't hit very hard. My guess would be a personality disorder.

I’m saying he got up and immediately started arguing vigorously so the refs certainly didn’t think he got hit very hard.

Also, thanks for the diagnosis Doctor Jackass. Your patients must love you.

 

[steverocks35]

If any blow to the head, excessive or not, intentional or not, is supposed to be a flagrant 1 then the refs should be calling about 20 a game. This might be an example of the rule being too broad to be effective.

Guys dribbling the ball coming off a screen get bumped in the head by the hedger all the time. Is that a flagrant 1? By the letter of the rule apparently it is.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

In my opinion, it was either a flagrant 1 or a non-call because it was clearly incidental contact. Once they decided that it was not excessive and not intentional then it was a no-call. That's just my opinion, I obviously can't read the refs' minds.

LOL I'm sure others have pointed out the wrongs in this message. SO i'll just add another LOL

 

[SoonerBounce13]

[TWEET]https://twitter.com/JaymOU13/status/1485012814460768258?s=20[/TWEET]

I found a tweet that had the actual replay of the hit. At the bare minimum this should have been a common foul, and there is enough justification for a flagrant foul 1.

From the video, Mayer jumps to block Grove's is shot, but he's jumping recklessly.

This clip from youtube has the full play - https://youtu.be/gne5Lnhv9ew?t=869.

Goldwire throws an inaccurate pass, which causes Groves to not catch it cleanly, and he has to bend/turn to gather the ball. As soon as Mayer saw the pass, he crashed in to help, and pre-determined he was going for the block.
If Groves catches it cleanly, it's still a foul cause Mayer was jumping in no man's land. In this scenario, Grove's feels him, and just holds on to the ball to draw the foul.

It's at least a common foul because he's jumping into Groves. Enough justification for a flagrant 1 cause a knee to the head is excessive.

Nobody in their right mind would say that isn't at least a common foul lol.
And to say it is either a no call or a flagrant might be even more ridiculous

 

[SoonerBounce13]

I’m saying he got up and immediately started arguing vigorously so the refs certainly didn’t think he got hit very hard.

Also, thanks for the diagnosis Doctor Jackass. Your patients must love you.

dude lol.

How fast he gets up has nothing to do with it.
People get hit all the time in football or in fights and bounce right up. That doesn't mean they weren't hit hard.

This is seriously the dumbest take I have ever seen on this board

 

[schoonerdriver]

I’m saying he got up and immediately started arguing vigorously so the refs certainly didn’t think he got hit very hard.

Also, thanks for the diagnosis Doctor Jackass. Your patients must love you.

If called fouls based on player's reactions, both teams would foul out, every game. Also, the refs aren't paid to think. They are their to observe. Any knee going up and someone's head going down is a hard blow. Groves shouldn't be penalized because he isn't Glass Joe.

 

[SoonerBounce13]

If called fouls based on player's reactions, both teams would foul out, every game. Also, the refs aren't paid to think. They are their to observe. Any knee going up and someone's head going down is a hard blow. Groves shouldn't be penalized because he isn't Glass Joe.

i'll also add that groves didn't immediately get up lol.

 

[vbdad]

It would usually be called a flagrant on replay. However it is an obvious foul. If his knee doesn't hit TG's head his body was going to hit into him. Knee knocked them in opposite directions. Baylor gained an advantage by knocking down the TG.

 

[Seymore Cox]

Can't tell if serious.

In general, I can get behind that. In the context of this play, the dude got kneed square in the face by a 6'9", 225 lb division 1 athlete. I was shocked he popped up the way he did.

I was serious, but I like the taste of crow.

 

[NorthCarolinaSooner]

Did he gain an advantage on the play with the contact? No? Then it's not a foul if you rule that it's not excessive and not intentional.

I'll say this.....there are fouls that are intentional and there are plenty that are NOT intentional. You don't "not" call a foul simply because it doesn't give the player an advantage. Sometimes there is simply incidental contact that is till a foul. If they don't call it they don't call it....but you can't/shouldn't officiate a game where you have to determine in a split second that

a.was it intentional?

b.did it give one guy an advantage over the other

if it is a foul call it......now calling it an "intentional" foul is different but call the foul and THEN determine if it is intentional or not.

I realize that officiating is often subjective but I have been coaching basketball at the HS and college levels for 24 years......that is my opinion. That being said...officials and I do not always see eye to eye. LOL