ISU and Montana Game

profisme · Post by **profisme** » Fri Feb 10, 2006 12:53 pm

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=2322530

Fullerton said that no further suspension was warranted for Matt Dloughy. If anyone happened to see the incident, you can see that Dloughy fouled Kinghorn on purpose by pulling him down by his jersey while Kinghorn was going up for a layup. Kinghorn abruptly stopped his ascension and came down hard on his upper back/neck area. I believe he got a concussion from the incident. That foul was not only extremely violent and dangerous, but it was also completely intentional.

To read that Fullerton has given no further suspension to Dloughy is disheartening. Fullerton needs to grow a pair or to stop being incompetent, that is an absolutely abysmal decision.

Later in that game, Matt Martin tackled Slim Milian and was only called for a personal foul. Not only are the refs not in control of the games, but when things like this happen, there will almost always be more violence later in the game/year between the two teams.

Hell's Bells · Post by **Hell's Bells** » Fri Feb 10, 2006 12:55 pm

and yet another reason to hate fullerton

Ponycat · Post by **Ponycat** » Fri Feb 10, 2006 1:11 pm

Martin is the biggest cheap shot in the Big Sky...dare I say a thug.

Dloughy's foul was intentional and he should have been suspended. He even said the thought he would be. But in his defense I don't think he meant it to be as bad as it was. He was obviously concerned for the guy he fouled as soon as it happened. Doesn't excuse it but I don't think the intent was as bad as the outcome.

grizbeer · Post by **grizbeer** » Fri Feb 10, 2006 1:20 pm

Ponycat wrote: Dloughy's foul was intentional and he should have been suspended.

Just to clarify, intentional fouls do not qualify for suspension - flagrant fouls do. The foul was definitely intentional, but debatable if it was flagrant.

The first ruling on the floor was that it was intentional but not flagrant - meaning it was a technical foul, but no ejection. After Kinghorn wandered over towards the Montana bench he was ejected - then Dloughy's foul was changed to flagrant.

I'm sure in the ref's mind they couldn't eject Kinghorn without ejecting Dloughy and still make it out of the building alive, so they changed the call to flagrant, not because it was what they believed it was, but to prevent a riot. BTW from what i saw on TV Kinghorn shouldn't have been kicked out either, but at that point the refs had lost control of the game and over-reacted to Kinghorn's shove of Martin and stumbling towards the bench trying to prevent a fight.

Dloughy thought he would get suspended because it is pretty much automatic with an ejection.

profisme · Post by **profisme** » Fri Feb 10, 2006 1:30 pm

From what it looked like, Dloughy grabbed Kinghorn because he was being sealed off and that was the only want to prevent an easy layup. In my opinion it was not only intentional but quite flagrant. I doubt that Dloughy meant to physically harm Kinghorn, but I also believe that he should have served a minimum of 1 game suspension.

As for Kinghorn's ejection, I doubt it would have made much of a difference if he wasn't ejected as he was too woozy to actually play again in the game.

DriftCat · Post by **DriftCat** » Fri Feb 10, 2006 1:37 pm

It was intentional and flagrant. If you are sealed off and have no play on the ball, you hope one of your teammates steps up and makes a play. You DO NOT grab a players jersey when he is in the air and pull him backwards to prevent a layup. There have been players die coming down on the back op their heads like that. I definately think a suspention was in order for Dloughy.

Billings_Griz · Post by **Billings_Griz** » Fri Feb 10, 2006 2:37 pm

First of all, I agree that there isn't a place for flagrant fouls.

But I can see it now, Dloughy hits the game winner at the buzzer and Bozeman errupts into an all out riot.

grizbeer · Post by **grizbeer** » Fri Feb 10, 2006 3:31 pm

FYI here is the definition of flagrant and intentional fouls:

Art. 4. Flagrant personal foul, live ball. A flagrant personal foul shall be a
personal foul that involves severe or excessive contact with an opponent or
involves contact that is extreme in nature while the ball is live.
Art. 5. Flagrant technical foul, dead ball. A flagrant foul shall be a techni-
cal foul when it involves either unsporting conduct that is extreme in
nature, or severe, excessive contact against an opponent while the ball is
dead.
a. An exception is a foul by an airborne shooter.
Art. 6. Intentional personal foul. An intentional foul shall be a personal
foul that, on the basis of an official’s observation of the act, is not a legit-
imate attempt to directly play the ball or a player. Determination of
whether a personal foul is intentional shall not be based on the severity
of the act. Examples include, but are not limited to:
a. Fouling a player who is away from the ball and not directly
involved with the play.
b. Contact with a player making a throw-in.
c. Holding or pushing an opponent in order to stop the game clock.
d. Pushing a player from behind to prevent a score.
e. Causing excessive contact with an opponent while playing the ball.

I don't think it was clearly a flagrant foul - yes it created the risk of injury, but he grabbed his shirt to stop him from making the shot - clearly if he had pushed him from behind the risk of injury would have been just as severe, but by direct definition would have been an intentional, not flagrant foul.

Flagrant fouls are generally reserved for punching, kicking or intentionally elbowing someone, or fighting. I think it was clear to anyone who watched that Dloughy did not intend to injure the player, but did intend to make contact. The intentional foul was the right call.

profisme · Post by **profisme** » Fri Feb 10, 2006 3:38 pm

If he was simply trying to foul him to stop him from making the basket he could have let go. Instead he held onto the jersey almost until Kinghorn was on the ground. This was flagrant and excessive contact which could have caused a very severe injury. If Fullerton were to look at the tape with open eyes he would have seen that it was worth the suspension.

HelenaCat · Post by **HelenaCat** » Fri Feb 10, 2006 4:52 pm

I agree with profisme. When I saw that play live, my first thought was that the fact he did not let go made it flagrant. I could understand Dloughy grabbing at Kinghorn to try to prevent the layup, but when he held on and even appeared to keep pulling back on the jersey, it became excessive in my opinion.

catamaran · Post by **catamaran** » Fri Feb 10, 2006 5:57 pm

profisme wrote:http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=2322530

Fullerton said that no further suspension was warranted for Matt Dloughy. If anyone happened to see the incident, you can see that Dloughy fouled Kinghorn on purpose by pulling him down by his jersey while Kinghorn was going up for a layup. Kinghorn abruptly stopped his ascension and came down hard on his upper back/neck area. I believe he got a concussion from the incident. That foul was not only extremely violent and dangerous, but it was also completely intentional.

To read that Fullerton has given no further suspension to Dloughy is disheartening. Fullerton needs to grow a pair or to stop being incompetent, that is an absolutely abysmal decision.

Later in that game, Matt Martin tackled Slim Milian and was only called for a personal foul. Not only are the refs not in control of the games, but when things like this happen, there will almost always be more violence later in the game/year between the two teams.

I don't think anyone will mess in Pokey, they pack

UMclassof2002 · Post by **UMclassof2002** » Fri Feb 10, 2006 6:48 pm

Didn't see the foul, can't comment on the ruling.

Fullerton still needs to take long walk off a short dock.

whitetrashgriz · Post by **whitetrashgriz** » Fri Feb 10, 2006 10:07 pm

game speed guys. lots of stuff happens out there in the heat of things that sometimes is hard to control. it was a hard foul, but not intentional imo. look at dlouhy's track record. he has never been dirty. but he does always play well against us. he understands what this rivalry is, and i think if he was a dirty player, and didn't worry about consequences, then he'd take down diss, or jaron beofre some dude who plays for one of the worst team in the league. i like his game, i like how he plays, and i'd love to see him lose tomorrow! but i think his ejection was plenty, and look forward to seeing him play tomorrow. not looking for anyone to agree with me, just stating my opinion on the matter.

grizzh8r · Post by **grizzh8r** » Sat Feb 11, 2006 12:26 am

whitetrashgriz wrote:game speed guys. lots of stuff happens out there in the heat of things that sometimes is hard to control. it was a hard foul, but not intentional imo. look at dlouhy's track record. he has never been dirty. but he does always play well against us. he understands what this rivalry is, and i think if he was a dirty player, and didn't worry about consequences, then he'd take down diss, or jaron beofre some dude who plays for one of the worst team in the league. i like his game, i like how he plays, and i'd love to see him lose tomorrow! but i think his ejection was plenty, and look forward to seeing him play tomorrow. not looking for anyone to agree with me, just stating my opinion on the matter.

Yeah. I want to beat the Griz with all of them available to play. No excuses.

WolfPtCat · Post by **WolfPtCat** » Sat Feb 11, 2006 10:10 am

profisme wrote:http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=2322530

Later in that game, Matt Martin tackled Slim Milian and was only called for a personal foul. Not only are the refs not in control of the games, but when things like this happen, there will almost always be more violence later in the game/year between the two teams.

I also thought the Martin play on Milian looked bad when it happened. After veiwing the replay, I changed my mind. It looked like they got tangled up and Milian was off balance. That is what brought Milian down on top of Martin. I couldn't believe how different it looked from live, game speed to slow motion replay.

ISU and Montana Game

ISU and Montana Game

Re: ISU and Montana Game

Re: ISU and Montana Game