PDA

View Full Version : Defender claws Karno's face after blocking shot. Flagrant? Foul? or no Foul?



ZagsGoZags
04-01-2017, 09:08 PM
Did the refs call this right?
Am I so biased I can't see the big picture?
Remember when the Loyola defender just ran over NWG this year?
At least that was called.
The play today was called a no Foul.
Reminds of when Perkins got that karate kick in the jaw. No Foul.
Is it just me, or do we get a lot more of these blows than we dish out?
I can't think of any foul , or crushing blow not called Foul, committed by GU,
like these shots it seems we take, at least in the last few years.

I thought this should have been called a foul tonight, because after he blocked Karno's
ball, he continued with force down through Karnowski's face.

Some of you know the rules better than I, and I would love to get your opinion.

ProVeeZag
04-01-2017, 09:18 PM
I do think the play warranted a look at the video since there was contact initiated that resulted in a blow to the opponent's head (i.e. the face is part of the head, ok?) I do not think a review of the video would have resulted in any type of flagrant foul. But I agree with you, ZGZ, that our Zags do absorb more of these kinds of "hard" fouls than they dish out. That speaks to a) the kind of kids that get recruited to GU, and b) the culture of play that Coach Few has instilled with his teams. Thankfully, Karno is ok and doesn't appear to have any lasting injury.

MJ777
04-01-2017, 09:18 PM
Did the refs call this right?
Am I so biased I can't see the big picture?
Remember when the Loyola defender just ran over NWG this year?
At least that was called.
The play today was called a no Foul.
Reminds of when Perkins got that karate kick in the jaw. No Foul.
Is it just me, or do we get a lot more of these blows than we dish out?
I can't think of any foul , or crushing blow not called Foul, committed by GU,
like these shots it seems we take, at least in the last few years.

I thought this should have been called a foul tonight, because after he blocked Karno's
ball, he continued with force down through Karnowski's face.

Some of you know the rules better than I, and I would love to get your opinion.

If that is not a foul then I don't know what is. I'm surprised they didn't call it on his beard.

JPtheBeasta
04-01-2017, 09:22 PM
It seems that the eye-rake on the follow through is ignored more often than not when a shot is otherwise blocked cleanly.

kitzbuel
04-01-2017, 09:35 PM
The physicality of that game was crazy. Guys being thrown to the floor off of dribble drives, Karno taking a shot to the eye while shooting. It was a battle.

And the Williams gets called for an offensive foulwhile protecting the ball on a dribble.

We won.

cggonzaga
04-01-2017, 09:46 PM
Did the refs call this right?
Am I so biased I can't see the big picture?
Remember when the Loyola defender just ran over NWG this year?
At least that was called.
The play today was called a no Foul.
Reminds of when Perkins got that karate kick in the jaw. No Foul.
Is it just me, or do we get a lot more of these blows than we dish out?
I can't think of any foul , or crushing blow not called Foul, committed by GU,
like these shots it seems we take, at least in the last few years.

I thought this should have been called a foul tonight, because after he blocked Karno's
ball, he continued with force down through Karnowski's face.

Some of you know the rules better than I, and I would love to get your opinion.

Definitely a foul. The officials were also absolutely brutal in the second half as well. Just makes what this team has accomplished this year even more impressive. No matter the adversity, they prevail.

WBM
04-01-2017, 09:49 PM
As I understand it the follow-through after a clean, "all ball" block is considered incidental contact and is not a foul. There was an example of this in a game recently where one of our players went up for a shot and got blocked, after which the defender's body followed through and slammed into our player full speed in mid-air. I don't recall that being called a foul.

In my opinion that should be given consideration as a foul, just like an "over the back" call is not about literally going over someone's back so much as it is about the right to occupy the space you currently occupy; I think incidental contact after a clean block should be reviewed in a situation like today.

But hey, Perks getting his jaw broken by a flying kick to the face wasn't a foul, so what is?

zagbeliever
04-01-2017, 09:53 PM
They call fouls on Shem for just being tall...consistently

bballbeachbum
04-01-2017, 10:01 PM
did not look incidental

jpn17
04-01-2017, 10:06 PM
As I understand it the follow-through after a clean, "all ball" block is considered incidental contact and is not a foul. There was an example of this in a game recently where one of our players went up for a shot and got blocked, after which the defender's body followed through and slammed into our player full speed in mid-air. I don't recall that being called a foul.

But hey, Perks getting his jaw broken by a flying kick to the face wasn't a foul, so what is?

In most cases I would agree, but excessive contact is supposed to be a flagrant foul with emphasis on contact above the shoulders. Both occurred on that play and IMO it should have been a flagrant 1. But as others have said Gonzaga pulled it out regardless which was awesome.

The no flagrant on Perk's broken jaw still blows my mind.

maynard g krebs
04-01-2017, 10:18 PM
As I understand it the follow-through after a clean, "all ball" block is considered incidental contact and is not a foul. There was an example of this in a game recently where one of our players went up for a shot and got blocked, after which the defender's body followed through and slammed into our player full speed in mid-air. I don't recall that being called a foul.



Haven't actually looked it up, but it seems like the principle of verticality should apply, both in the case of lateral body movement striking the shooter after the block and when swinging the arms down and striking the shooter in the head.

But I guess it's like traveling and palming the ball, both of which the NBA legalized de facto gradually during the 80's and it trickled down to lower levels from there.

Hard to say definitively, but it looked to me like the SC goon accelerated his downswing toward Karno's face after his arm momentum was slowed by contact with the ball.

Zagsker
04-02-2017, 07:14 AM
.....That speaks to a) the kind of kids that get recruited to GU, and b) the culture of play that Coach Few has instilled with his teams.....

Ugh... GU has had players smack other players in the face just as unintentional as the one to PK received yesterday...I loathe comments that convey a"nose in the air "OUR players would NEVER do that" narrative about our program because it's not true and makes one look elitist

john montana
04-02-2017, 07:19 AM
Looked like a foul to me. Not a dirty play but a pretty clear foul.

willandi
04-02-2017, 07:23 AM
Should the Zags teach the "after a block follow through and hit him because they won't call it?

I don't think so, but I do think that Karno getting poked in the eye was, at the least, a foul and possibly a fragrant 1. It wasn't intentional, it did occur above the neck, and it left him writhing in pain while SC went down court to play 5 on 4 and score.

At the absolute least, it should have been reviewed while the medical team attended to Karno. Just in the interests in fairness and honesty.

Bogozags
04-02-2017, 07:29 AM
As a prior official, the Lead Official, who is on the Baseline, was responsible for the shooter and imo he should have called a common personal foul and PK should have gotten two free throws. PK was an Air-Borne shooter and remains one until he returns to the ground.

This was not a Flagrant I or II as Silva made a play on the ball!

bballbeachbum
04-02-2017, 07:36 AM
Hard to say definitively, but it looked to me like the SC goon accelerated his downswing toward Karno's face after his arm momentum was slowed by contact with the ball.

good look at it here starting at 1:40
the video itself is a nice look at Karno's game last night


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5TOM08iBZZ4

DixieZag
04-02-2017, 07:45 AM
Should the Zags teach the "after a block follow through and hit him because they won't call it?

I don't think so, but I do think that Karno getting poked in the eye was, at the least, a foul and possibly a fragrant 1. It wasn't intentional, it did occur above the neck, and it left him writhing in pain while SC went down court to play 5 on 4 and score.

At the absolute least, it should have been reviewed while the medical team attended to Karno. Just in the interests in fairness and honesty.
"
I don't recall them even reviewing it. If they didn't (and, again, I don't think they did), it really should occur to a ref, "how did a guy end up with a serious eye injury, perhaps we should review it?"

North Idaho Zag
04-02-2017, 07:47 AM
A jump shooter can get touched on the wrist AFTER the ball has left his hand and it's a foul but this is not??? Whatever. After what happened in the women's FF game on Sat. where they reviewed contact and called a flagrant after what amounted to two change of possessions later, I was dumbfounded by the no call.

cjm720
04-02-2017, 07:56 AM
No foul.

zagamatic
04-02-2017, 07:59 AM
I believe that in part, the flagrant rule of excessive contact above the shoulders is INTENDED to keep AGGRESSIVE play at bay to prevent serious injuries later in the game. It's very clear that the SC player swung at the ball aggressively, made contact to the face, AND IN THIS CASE, caused an injury. IMO, this does fit the spirit of the rule.

MontanaCoyote
04-02-2017, 08:34 AM
[QUOTE=zagbeliever;1311845]They call fouls on Shem for just being tall...consistently[/QUOTE

And Wide. We are fortunate that Karno is so good at keeping his cool. The guy is a victim of felonious assault time and time again but ALWAYS keeps it together. Good On Him!

Hoopaholic
04-02-2017, 10:20 AM
I believe that in part, the flagrant rule of excessive contact above the shoulders is INTENDED to keep AGGRESSIVE play at bay to prevent serious injuries later in the game. It's very clear that the SC player swung at the ball aggressively, made contact to the face, AND IN THIS CASE, caused an injury. IMO, this does fit the spirit of the rule.

Foul yes
Flagrant No

why......it was in the context of making a basketball play (block shot) but the follow thru was contact while in the act of shooting and was a blatant miss call but was not flagrant by definition

Hoopaholic
04-02-2017, 10:21 AM
As a prior official, the Lead Official, who is on the Baseline, was responsible for the shooter and imo he should have called a common personal foul and PK should have gotten two free throws. PK was an Air-Borne shooter and remains one until he returns to the ground.

This was not a Flagrant I or II as Silva made a play on the ball!

I agree

ProVeeZag
04-02-2017, 10:25 AM
Ugh... GU has had players smack other players in the face just as unintentional as the one to PK received yesterday...I loathe comments that convey a"nose in the air "OUR players would NEVER do that" narrative about our program because it's not true and makes one look elitist

Thanks for your feedback. Hope your team does well tomorrow.

MickMick
04-02-2017, 10:27 AM
To me, it fits the definition of Flagrant One. Even inadvertent contact with the head is a foul.

I was concerned with number of "over the back" infractions USC committed on Karno. Will they let Meeks do the same thing?

ProVeeZag
04-02-2017, 10:30 AM
To me, it fits the definition of Flagrant One. Even inadvertent contact with the head is a foul.

I was concerned with number of "over the back" infractions USC committed on Karno. Will they let Meeks do the same thing?

I'm sure we will find out ... Meeks will see the game film and take notice of what is allowed and what isn't. Any potential advantage will be exploited.

MDABE80
04-02-2017, 10:31 AM
Even the Russians knew it was a foul;)
Refs missed on this one. Foul and a hard one.
Karno played a heckuva game. The video shows how well he's devoped this season. Such a unique player. He'll be fine with Meeks.

ScrapironJim
04-02-2017, 01:14 PM
To me, it fits the definition of Flagrant One. Even inadvertent contact with the head is a foul.

I was concerned with number of "over the back" infractions USC committed on Karno. Will they let Meeks do the same thing?

Meeks was over the back times ten on the last rebound of the Oregon game. He also spent the entire game standing under the NC basket with no three second calls. That's how he got those 25 points - off of cheap put backs. I worry about the refs tomorrow night.

Worthington
04-02-2017, 01:32 PM
I really wasn't sure what to make of this call. I don't know what the official rule is, but it seems to me that you shouldn't be allowed to swing your arm down hard enough to punch somebody in the face on a block attempt, even if you do get the ball cleanly.