Choose a blog

Gottfried disagrees with flagrant foul call

Bookmark and Share

Scott Wood, NC State

N.C. State's Scott Wood reacts after he was called for a flagrant foul during the second half of N.C. State's 86-75 loss to Indiana on Wednesday, Nov. 30, 2011, at the RBC Center. Staff photo by Ethan Hyman.

RALEIGH — Indiana guard Victor Oladipo was a step ahead of N.C. State's Scott Wood, with a clear path to the basket.

With his team down three points with less than 3 minutes to play, Wood played the percentages and sent Oladipo to the foul line, instead of ceding an easy basket.

Referee Earl Walton called a flagrant foul on Wood, giving the Hoosiers two free throws plus possession of the ball.

Wood's good intentions ended up stretching Indiana's lead to 76-70. N.C. State coach Mark Gottfried got into an animated discussion with Walton on State's next possession, needing to be held back by assistants Bobby Lutz and Jeff Dunlap.

After the game, Gottfried said he didn't agree with the call, but also said it wasn't the difference in the game, an 86-75 loss for the Wolfpack. (See 105 photos from the game.)

"You always have to be careful with what you say but I thought Scott clearly went after the basketball," Gottfried said. "That one is a little bit frustrating for me."

John Clougherty, the head of ACC officials, said he reviewed the call Thursday morning and, like every official, Walton's performance would be reviewed and evaluated.

There are set guidelines for flagrant fouls, Clougherty said, but ultimately it's the judgment of the referee.

"They have to use some judgment, not everything is clear cut," Clougherty said Thursday. "That has always been part of the game and always will be."

In a slight change to NCAA terminology, the word "intentional" has been replaced by flagrant. There are now two types of flagrant fouls — flagrant 1 and flagrant 2.

Wood was whistled for a flagrant 1 foul, which gave Oladipo the free throws and Indiana the ball. A flagrant 2 foul is accompanied by an ejection and reserved for physical fouls and altercations, like a thrown punch or, as Clougherty put it, an "egregious" act.

The ESPN replay of Wood's foul, showed he did use two hands, which Walton could have interpreted as a "wrap-up" foul, which falls under the umbrella of a flagrant foul in the rule book.

The play started when Indiana's Will Sheehey tipped a C.J. Leslie pass, intended for DeShawn Painter in front of the N.C. State basket, to Oladipo.

Oladipo dribbled down the court when Wood caught him near the top of the key. Wood swiped at the ball with his right hand and the reached behind Oladipo's back with his other hand.

Walton, two steps to Wood's left, immediately crossed his wrists to signal the flagrant foul. Oladipo made only one of two free throws, but Indiana got the ball and Jordan Hulls got fouled on the in-bounds play and made both of his free throws.

Down 76-70, State scored the next five points. A goaltending call on a C.J. Williams layup at 2:03 gave the Wolfpack new life, after the debatable call.

Hulls ended State's last push, though, when he buried a 3-pointer with 1:38 left.

"That call didn't lose us the game, we did enough things to hurt ourselves," Gottfried said.

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

It was a bad call. It did

It was a bad call. It did effect the outcome, but not as much as missing 5 out of 6 freethrows down the stretch.

Terrible call

Earlier in the game, Lorenzo Brown was going up for a fast break dunk when the Indiana defender then grabbed Brown's arm from behind (right around the elbow) and pulled it down.  If that play didn't warrant a "flagrant 1", then there is now way Wood's foul did.  I understand the idea of judgement calls, but you have to be consistent throughout the game.

timing has a lot ot do with it

whether it is right or wrong is irrelevant.  Perception and desperation.  The perception during the first 35 or so minutes of the game is not the same as the last 5 or so.  life is not fair, max.

You look desperate in the waning moments of a close game that you are losing when you make a play on the ball/player going for a break awya lay-up. 

melvinfunk!!!

DUKE IS A WINNER AND STATE IS A LOSER, ENOUGH SAID!!!GO BLUEDEVILS!!!

Race Card

I'm quite certain that this was a racial issue. The white kid kept the black kid from geting a monster-dunk. The black ref was pissed and tee'd him up.

towerman

towerman, your comment is pathetic.

Bad call

Yes, it was a bad call.

No, iit didn't affect the outcome.

Yes, Scott needs to be smarter in that situation. The ref is going to make that call every time.

Good call, bad call

I agree that the ref is going to make that call everytime. Using two hands and the appearance of a wrap up, was the key, esp as a player is driving to the basket. Therefore, it seemed like the appropriate call to me. Of course MG is gonna argue.

imagine

there's only one way to look at this call:  what if it had happened the other way around ?  Irrelevant really.

Why ?

Common sense says if a guy has a break away lay-up/dunk and the trailing defender wraps BOTH HANDS around the offensive player it's gonna be called intentional or flagrant over 90% of the time. 

Stop the presses! Coach doesn't like official's call!

Golly, a college basketball coach getting upset at an official's call. Doesn't that happen several times just about every game? Heck, it seems as if The Rat gets upset at EVERY call that does against the Dookies . . . .

Cars View All
Find a Car
Go
Jobs View All
Find a Job
Go
Homes View All
Find a Home
Go

Want to post a comment?

In order to join the conversation, you must be a member of newsobserver.com. Click here to register or to log in.

About the blogger

Joe Giglio covers the ACC for the News & Observer, where he has worked since 1997.
Advertisements