ADVERTISEMENT

Whacked in throat

agree to disagree. i see it as a normal boxing out movement and incidental contact. i don't see any conspiracy or a blown call.

i didn't see it, but using your logic i assume you also believe Noah's neck contact must also have warranted a flagrant call because "you have to control your own body" and it couldn't possibly "have been required by the circumstances" ?

That logic falls flat. Contact happens incidentally, even above the shoulders.
Agree to disagree, there is no conspiracy, no grand scheme, they just got it wrong…..like I said, this is way worse and stands out more than all the other typical missed calls that took place because THEY HAD THE BENEFIT OF REPLAY AND STILL GOT IT WRONG. I just watched it again and Key delivered an elbow that was too high…….Cliff ran into it…….lol
so according to you the Noah contact had to be flagrant as well ? because I cannot imagine a circumstance where a player couldn't avoid neck contact with another upright player.
 
I agree with the "not intentional but should have been called" crowd. This combined with the phantom foul on Williams at the end to extend the lead from 3 to 5 were basically the difference in the game.

Also agree with @toby83 that there has to be some sort of retaliation in the rematch.
 
so according to you the Noah contact had to be flagrant as well ? because I cannot imagine a circumstance where a player couldn't avoid neck contact with another upright player.

I wouldn’t know, the refs didn’t review it and I didn’t see a replay of it. May have been, maybe Noah did the limbo and faked it as well, right??? Who knows? But I do know the contact with Cliff was a flagrant 1, not a flagrant 2, but it was a 1.
 
Thank you!!! He should have been tossed. I don’t think he was actively trying to disable Cliff but that was without a doubt an intentional dirty play. If this was a college football it would have been targeting and he would have been justifiably thrown out of the game. Kinda play that Pope of SHU would use.
That’s exactly the person I thought of haha
 
  • Like
Reactions: G- RUnit
Honest question: do the "whack in throat" posters apply equal levels of analysis to plays in which other teams make similar accusations about Rutgers players? (I suspect not). For instance, there were a couple plays in your bowl game for which many Miami fans think charges should have been filed, ha ha. The "T" word was used...
 
  • Wow
Reactions: cRURah
Honest question: do the "whack in throat" posters apply equal levels of analysis to plays in which other teams make similar accusations about Rutgers players? (I suspect not). For instance, there were a couple plays in your bowl game for which many Miami fans think charges should have been filed, ha ha. The "T" word was used...
Or the Mulcahy trips which were undeniably intentional
 
I wouldn’t know, the refs didn’t review it and I didn’t see a replay of it. May have been, maybe Noah did the limbo and faked it as well, right??? Who knows? But I do know the contact with Cliff was a flagrant 1, not a flagrant 2, but it was a 1.
By your logic (avoidable via body control) there’s no possibility of it not also being flagrant whether you saw it or not
 
By your logic (avoidable via body control) there’s no possibility of it not also being flagrant whether you saw it or not
Once again, who knows???? Maybe Noah self-sabotaged himself and chopped himself in the neck? Maybe one of his own teammates did it to him??? Maybe one of his own teammates pushed an OSU player which caused him to be hit in the throat?? We can all be annoying and difficult all day, but once again that one was not reviewed and WHO KNOWS??? Getting back on the topic, once again, I do know a review was conducted on Cliff’s, we all watched that review, and that one was a Flagrant 1. They got it wrong, pretty simple, you don’t think it’s a Flagrant 1 obviously…..no need for deflections, changing topics, Paul’s trips, etc.. Paul’s trips were wrong as well, no one is here to defend that, but it’s off topic, stay on point as to why Cliff’s is not a flagrant 1.
 
Once again, who knows???? Maybe Noah self-sabotaged himself and chopped himself in the neck? Maybe one of his own teammates did it to him??? Maybe one of his own teammates pushed an OSU player which caused him to be hit in the throat?? We can all be annoying and difficult all day, but once again that one was not reviewed and WHO KNOWS??? Getting back on the topic, once again, I do know a review was conducted on Cliff’s, we all watched that review, and that one was a Flagrant 1. They got it wrong, pretty simple, you don’t think it’s a Flagrant 1 obviously…..no need for deflections, changing topics, Paul’s trips, etc.. Paul’s trips were wrong as well, no one is here to defend that, but it’s off topic, stay on point as to why Cliff’s is not a flagrant 1.
Oh there sure were people denying the trips. (defensive instinct, reflex, etc).

Can you explain Cliff’s ongoing bad luck with so many game-stopping injuries ? Yes he rolled his ankle, am not talking about that. And Nevermind the stupid high ankle sprain comment by Bardo just like his stupid windpipe diagnosis.

Do you see a pattern or do you see bad luck ?
 
Oh there sure were people denying the trips. (defensive instinct, reflex, etc).

Can you explain Cliff’s ongoing bad luck with so many game-stopping injuries ? Yes he rolled his ankle, am not talking about that. And Nevermind the stupid high ankle sprain comment by Bardo just like his stupid windpipe diagnosis.

Do you see a pattern or do you see bad luck ?
Staying on topic is not your thing I guess. I don’t need to explain Cliff as the topic was whether a Flagrant 1 should have been called.
 
Honest question: do the "whack in throat" posters apply equal levels of analysis to plays in which other teams make similar accusations about Rutgers players? (I suspect not). For instance, there were a couple plays in your bowl game for which many Miami fans think charges should have been filed, ha ha. The "T" word was used...

You'll have to be more specific with regards to the play(s) you are referring to - but generally yes, there is discussion about our players - there was for instance a back and forth on both sides from RU Fans regarding the Mulchahy trip (and head butt I recall as well) last year that the troll in this thread brought up. In regards to the Pinstripe bowl there were 2 Late/cheap shots that were taken and called against Miami that has a thread on the football board in case you missed it. Do Maryland fans aggressively and continually "eat their own" and call their own players divas or fakers when elbowed in the neck and subject to what was likely a Flagrant 1?
 
  • Like
Reactions: #1 RUFan
You'll have to be more specific with regards to the play(s) you are referring to - but generally yes, there is discussion about our players - there was for instance a back and forth on both sides from RU Fans regarding the Mulchahy trip (and head butt I recall as well) last year that the troll in this thread brought up. In regards to the Pinstripe bowl there were 2 Late/cheap shots that were taken and called against Miami that has a thread on the football board in case you missed it. Do Maryland fans aggressively and continually "eat their own" and call their own players divas or fakers when elbowed in the neck and subject to what was likely a Flagrant 1?
With regard to your bowl game -- I have no idea what plays they were talking about, and I doubt anything serious really happened, or if it did, it was not malicious or even intentional. I didn't watch it. I was simply making the point that there are likely just as many incidental "throat whacks" going in both directions.

There is far less discussion of referee injustice in the Maryland fanbase than what I see here on TKR. When one of our dudes gets belted in the face, the reaction is mostly "Stuff happens." I doubt you believe me, but since you asked, I am answering.

Even though it doesn't matter, I like a discussion of what should happen when our own players don't behave properly, such as when our defensive lineman twisted your quarterback's ankle (he should have been suspended). But in general, I find these discussions of "their guy hit our guy" to be tiresome and subjective...
 
With regard to your bowl game -- I have no idea what plays they were talking about, and I doubt anything serious really happened, or if it did, it was not malicious or even intentional. I didn't watch it. I was simply making the point that there are likely just as many incidental "throat whacks" going in both directions.

There is far less discussion of referee injustice in the Maryland fanbase than what I see here on TKR. When one of our dudes gets belted in the face, the reaction is mostly "Stuff happens." I doubt you believe me, but since you asked, I am answering.

Even though it doesn't matter, I like a discussion of what should happen when our own players don't behave properly, such as when our defensive lineman twisted your quarterback's ankle (he should have been suspended). But in general, I find these discussions of "their guy hit our guy" to be tiresome and subjective...
One step further: for some reason there’s over the top homerism here. It’s lame.
 
Once again, who knows???? Maybe Noah self-sabotaged himself and chopped himself in the neck? Maybe one of his own teammates did it to him??? Maybe one of his own teammates pushed an OSU player which caused him to be hit in the throat?? We can all be annoying and difficult all day, but once again that one was not reviewed and WHO KNOWS??? Getting back on the topic, once again, I do know a review was conducted on Cliff’s, we all watched that review, and that one was a Flagrant 1. They got it wrong, pretty simple, you don’t think it’s a Flagrant 1 obviously…..no need for deflections, changing topics, Paul’s trips, etc.. Paul’s trips were wrong as well, no one is here to defend that, but it’s off topic, stay on point as to why Cliff’s is not a flagrant 1.
We got called for 15 yard penalties, it’s not like the refs looked the other way. The game was chippy on both sides. I don’t know how a ref looks at that video and says no foul.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Loyal-Son
With regard to your bowl game -- I have no idea what plays they were talking about, and I doubt anything serious really happened, or if it did, it was not malicious or even intentional. I didn't watch it. I was simply making the point that there are likely just as many incidental "throat whacks" going in both directions.

There is far less discussion of referee injustice in the Maryland fanbase than what I see here on TKR. When one of our dudes gets belted in the face, the reaction is mostly "Stuff happens." I doubt you believe me, but since you asked, I am answering.

Even though it doesn't matter, I like a discussion of what should happen when our own players don't behave properly, such as when our defensive lineman twisted your quarterback's ankle (he should have been suspended). But in general, I find these discussions of "their guy hit our guy" to be tiresome and subjective...
I don’t think most people here think it was intentional or want Key suspended or thrown out of the game or anything. It’s more just I’m not sure what the purpose of having *any* unintentional contact be a flagrant is if that is not going to be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cm_13 and Kbee3
I don’t think most people here think it was intentional or want Key suspended or thrown out of the game or anything. It’s more just I’m not sure what the purpose of having *any* unintentional contact be a flagrant is if that is not going to be
Words are only that. Interpretation matters and the OSU refs determined it was incidental contact. No bias, no conspiracy, not out of the ordinary. the right call in a physical game. refs are pros. The know what’s flagrant when they see it on replay, and they recognized that it was not.
 
Dconifer did you ass lineman ever get punished for stepping on Vedral and breaking his ankle? Kid was a disgrace.
 
Dconifer did you ass lineman ever get punished for stepping on Vedral and breaking his ankle? Kid was a disgrace.
It isn't really the topic of this thread because it was without question brutal and done with intent, but I addressed that above. Easy for me to say, but I think our player should have been suspended (for more than a half a game, which is the only punishment meted out for this) or preferably, expelled from the program.

I actually didn't see it, I only read about it here, but I believe you guys. It was an absolute disgrace, as you said...
 
The notion that Key just had his arm out and Cliff “ran into it” is absurd and laughable. Did Nicole Brown Simpson just “run into” OJ’s knife too?

The replay clearly shows Key throwing his arm out (very high up) and striking Cliff in the neck. A flagrant foul does not require “intent to injure.” If you flail your arm recklessly like that and strike another player’s windpipe (or face etc), it’s a flagrant foul. EVEN IF YOU’RE MAKING A STANDARD BASKETBALL PLAY LIKE BOXING OUT AND THE CONTACT IS INCIDENTAL TO THAT PLAY.
 
The notion that Key just had his arm out and Cliff “ran into it” is absurd and laughable. Did Nicole Brown Simpson just “run into” OJ’s knife too?

The replay clearly shows Key throwing his arm out (very high up) and striking Cliff in the neck. A flagrant foul does not require “intent to injure.” If you flail your arm recklessly like that and strike another player’s windpipe (or face etc), it’s a flagrant foul. EVEN IF YOU’RE MAKING A STANDARD BASKETBALL PLAY LIKE BOXING OUT AND THE CONTACT IS INCIDENTAL TO THAT PLAY.
Ok, so what is your explanation of the referees’ decision ?
 
Let me guess — you’re a referee in your spare time? So they never get it wrong?
the claims here take it much further than a mistake: two refs and perhaps even a third courtside ref, video review and very clear rule wording.....so conspiracy or deliberate not following rules. What's your explanation ?

The phantom Thornton foul was a mistake. One ref and no review.
 
the refs and announcers didn’t see it like you did. So either they all got it wrong or you did.
My comments have nothing to do with announcers opinions or yours. I'm saying there should be no judgment or subjectivity to the question of whether a forearm to the neck is a foul. If the "victim" is standing up and does nothing to cause the incident other than playing basketball, the offender should receive a flagrant foul, much like a football player who hits another player in the head with his helmet. Intention shouldn't matter. If it happens, it should be a foul.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shelby65 and RAC93
My comments have nothing to do with announcers opinions or yours. I'm saying there should be no judgment or subjectivity to the question of whether a forearm to the neck is a foul. If the "victim" is standing up and does nothing to cause the incident other than playing basketball, the offender should receive a flagrant foul, much like a football player who hits another player in the head with his helmet. Intention shouldn't matter. If it happens, it should be a foul.
I understand your point. Maybe it should be, but it isn’t now. Players are in motion. Things happen.

And by ‘does nothing to cause the incident’ you include not looking or seeing the contact that’s about to happen, right ?

Running into a hard screen and catching an elbow to the nose doesn’t qualify right ?

That distinction isn’t in the rules. It’s a basketball play by the screener. Not flagrant and not even a foul. To me, and more importantly to the refs, what happened was a basketball play by Key….and also by Oskar in the clip (bad call IMO).

There is no conspiracy to screw Rutgers, which is the majority (homer) opinion here
 
the claims here take it much further than a mistake: two refs and perhaps even a third courtside ref, video review and very clear rule wording.....so conspiracy or deliberate not following rules. What's your explanation ?
Where is the "very clear rule wording" that says Key's forearm shiv to Cliff's windpipe is NOT a Flagrant foul. In fact, the rule wording seems to say it should have been a Flagrant 1.

"A flagrant 1 personal foul is a personal foul that is deemed excessive in nature (unwarranted or too much) and/or unnecessary (avoidable, uncalled for or not required by the circumstances of the play), but is not based solely on the severity of the act."​

 
Image below of Noah trying to guard Zed Key.. Key grabs and pulls Noah's left arm while putting forearm pressure on Noah's neck... Nothing flagrant and may not be a foul, but maybe Key likes using the forearm to neck technique.

I'm curious to know if, and about when during the game Noah also may have gotten whacked in the throat (as has been mentioned) so I can watch the video to see what actually happened...

https://postimg.cc/mzfMW6v9
 
  • Like
Reactions: Loyal-Son
Where is the "very clear rule wording" that says Key's forearm shiv to Cliff's windpipe is NOT a Flagrant foul. In fact, the rule wording seems to say it should have been a Flagrant 1.

"A flagrant 1 personal foul is a personal foul that is deemed excessive in nature (unwarranted or too much) and/or unnecessary (avoidable, uncalled for or not required by the circumstances of the play), but is not based solely on the severity of the act."​

so you see the referees' decision after video as completely contrary to the rule, and therefore a conspiracy against Rutgers. Gotcha.
 
With regard to your bowl game -- I have no idea what plays they were talking about, and I doubt anything serious really happened, or if it did, it was not malicious or even intentional. I didn't watch it.
There was one play in particular of which there could be no doubt as to motivation. One of Miami's guys came up from behind our kicker...far away from the actual play...and put a serious hit on him from behind.....directly behind.
The guy got a 15 yard unnecessary roughness penalty. He should have been kicked out of the game.
There was a lot of jawing before the game and the announcers speculated that the hit could have been in retaliation for something that was said during that jawing.
There's no way anyone could watch that hit and not think it was malicious and intentional.
And that was just the most egregious cheap shot of many by Miami in that game.
BTW, Schiano would have taken the perp out of the game for sure if one of his guys had done something like that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Loyal-Son
so you see the referees' decision after video as completely contrary to the rule, and therefore a conspiracy against Rutgers. Gotcha.
Where did I say conspiracy? Don’t create strawmen. Others in this thread may have said conspiracy, but not me. I just think they made the wrong decision after reviewing the replay.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RAC93 and Scangg
Where did I say conspiracy? Don’t create strawmen. Others in this thread may have said conspiracy, but not me. I just think they made the wrong decision after reviewing the replay.
Spot on assessment. They just got it wrong, very simple. Not a grand conspiracy, just a colossal error.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kbee3
Take another look at the replay. There were 2 refs reviewing it. At the end of their review, to me they appeared to make a decision and go to a third ref who didn’t see the replay and he shakes his head “no”
It appeared to me he was disagreeing with their decision. The third ref ( who must have been the lead) announces no foul.
Think RU got a bad call.
 
Take another look at the replay. There were 2 refs reviewing it. At the end of their review, to me they appeared to make a decision and go to a third ref who didn’t see the replay and he shakes his head “no”
It appeared to me he was disagreeing with their decision. The third ref ( who must have been the lead) announces no foul.
Think RU got a bad call.
I did see that two refs looked at it, thought they would call over the third ref to look at it, but they did not. Like you said, they then conferenced with the 3rd ref and went with no foul. Not sure what went down and the mechanics of the referee process, but they got it wrong.
 
Take another look at the replay. There were 2 refs reviewing it. At the end of their review, to me they appeared to make a decision and go to a third ref who didn’t see the replay and he shakes his head “no”
It appeared to me he was disagreeing with their decision. The third ref ( who must have been the lead) announces no foul.
Think RU got a bad call.
No question that it was a flagrant foul. Just.a bad call.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT