flagrant foul rule change recently... per my downloaded rule book... r.e. Illinois game.....

[GUNTERSVOL]

Fouls as a result of flagrant acts – (Rule 11-2.1.d.3) Established that if a player is called for a foul, and upon Instant Replay the officials see that the foul is a direct result of a Flagrant 1 or Flagrant 2 foul committed against the player who was originally assessed a foul, officials may remove the original foul on the player who was flagrantly fouled.

NOW>>>> what does the rule say about flagrant 2 calls.....

2. Flagrant 2 personal foul. A flagrant 2 personal foul is a personal foul that involves contact with an opponent that is not only excessive, but also severe (brutal, harsh, cruel) or extreme (dangerous, punishing),while the ball is live. In determining whether a foul has risen to the level of a flagrant 2, officials should consider the following:

a) The severity of the contact;

b) Whether a player is making a legitimate effort to block a shot. Note that a player may still be assessed a flagrant 2 foul on an attempted blocked shot when there are other factors, such as hard contact to the head or the defender winding up or emphatically following through with the contact. Depending on the nature of the contact, or the result of the contact, this foul also could be considered a flagrant 1 or common personal foul;`

c) The potential for injury resulting from the contact (e.g., a blow to the head or a foul committed while the player was in a vulnerable position). Depending on the nature of the contact, or the result of the contact, the foul also could be considered a flagrant 1 or common personal foul;

C sure seems in play for the play in question Saturday.

Sure would like to hear a statement from the replay folks on why it was not considered applicable for one of the levels defined in the rule. DON"T see any way they would have overturned a call made on the court either.

 

[OneVolNation]

When Shack got elbowed in the face and called for the foul, it could now be overturned and called against his opponent.

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

When Shack got elbowed in the face and called for the foul, it could now be overturned and called against his opponent.

Anybody read it different? COULD not must. Therefore could enforce both I THINK.

Edited to add….,,

The talking heads were wrong again, they said the original call had to stand.

 

[Dadof2Vols]

Fouls as a result of flagrant acts – (Rule 11-2.1.d.3) Established that if a player is called for a foul, and upon Instant Replay the officials see that the foul is a direct result of a Flagrant 1 or Flagrant 2 foul committed against the player who was originally assessed a foul, officials may remove the original foul on the player who was flagrantly fouled.

NOW>>>> what does the rule say about flagrant 2 calls.....

2. Flagrant 2 personal foul. A flagrant 2 personal foul is a personal foul that involves contact with an opponent that is not only excessive, but also severe (brutal, harsh, cruel) or extreme (dangerous, punishing),while the ball is live. In determining whether a foul has risen to the level of a flagrant 2, officials should consider the following:

a) The severity of the contact;

b) Whether a player is making a legitimate effort to block a shot. Note that a player may still be assessed a flagrant 2 foul on an attempted blocked shot when there are other factors, such as hard contact to the head or the defender winding up or emphatically following through with the contact. Depending on the nature of the contact, or the result of the contact, this foul also could be considered a flagrant 1 or common personal foul;`

c) The potential for injury resulting from the contact (e.g., a blow to the head or a foul committed while the player was in a vulnerable position). Depending on the nature of the contact, or the result of the contact, the foul also could be considered a flagrant 1 or common personal foul;

C sure seems in play for the play in question Saturday.

Sure would like to hear a statement from the replay folks on why it was not considered applicable for one of the levels defined in the rule. DON"T see any way they would have overturned a call made on the court either.

Did you not witness the Bias against UT in that game?

Had they overturned that call and actually reversed it, there would have been Texas branded water bottles hitting the court.

 

[walkenvol]

Did you not witness the Bias against UT in that game?

Had they overturned that call and actually reversed it, there would have been Texas branded water bottles hitting the court.

Naw, someone would have shoved the ref in the back!