Local Raleigh had picture of Forrest sticking his fingers in Zion’s eyes. Curiously the picture has been taken down. He did not foul Zion with a flat hand. Two of his fingers are in Zion’s eyes. Had to be intentional.
Will league office punish FSU player for intentional foul on Zion?
- Thread starter acc hoops
- Start date
We debated this a lot last night. There are people on both sides of the fence, but I really don't think it was. The picture you are talking about looks really bad and really incriminating, but in the pic below, there is no contact yet, and the fla St player is being hit in the face with the ball. I don't think he can even see where his hand is.
And as OAD pointed out, it would be really difficult to be that accurate with three guys involved and the play moving that fast. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's my opinion. I really hope I'm right and that guy isn't that dirty
And as OAD pointed out, it would be really difficult to be that accurate with three guys involved and the play moving that fast. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's my opinion. I really hope I'm right and that guy isn't that dirty
It was a play that looked bad when you look at a still photo. Should have been called a foul, but in all honesty, Williamson wasn't going anywhere with that play to begin with and the foul would have bailed him out of a poor play. It was unfortunate that he got hurt, but there was no intentional foul there.
Definitely feel it was intentional, as the fingers were curved and targeted directly toward eyes. Its a good topic for debate however, and I respect views on both sides.
As far as the league office I doubt they will look at it since "the three blind mice" all missed it. Had they called it, they could have reviewed it immediately to determine Flagrant and one. I agree w\Dirt in theory of Forrest should MAN UP and call or text Zion and check up on him, apologize if he hasnt already. I am particularly sensitive to this subject since a similar incident derailed a possible NBA career for John Scheyer.
OFC
As far as the league office I doubt they will look at it since "the three blind mice" all missed it. Had they called it, they could have reviewed it immediately to determine Flagrant and one. I agree w\Dirt in theory of Forrest should MAN UP and call or text Zion and check up on him, apologize if he hasnt already. I am particularly sensitive to this subject since a similar incident derailed a possible NBA career for John Scheyer.
OFC
I’m surprised that the FSU player didn’t break his finger on Zion’s eye.
I don't think it was intentional, but someone needs to step up and admit 1. It was a foul and it was missed and 2. Probably a flagrant. Like swinging elbows (can be) and hook and hold, there is no bad intent, it just happens.
K last week called out the officials on not knowing how to officiate Zion. He needs to continue. There is no reason that blatant of a call should be missed.
K last week called out the officials on not knowing how to officiate Zion. He needs to continue. There is no reason that blatant of a call should be missed.
They could have reviewed it regardless of no foul being called. It should have been reviewed. Foul should have been called on live play, but like someone else said, it was a crap play by Zion and would have been a bailout call. As for flagrant, hell no. There is no way to determine that it wasnt an attempted play on the ball.
Not true. If a player swings their elbows, even with no contact, it is supposed to be flagrant. If a player commits a common foul but does not go for the ball, it is a flagrant. Technically, no such thing as an intentional foul.
What I found below makes it sound to me like it has to be intentional, because it says "fouling to prevent" but I found a lot more sites that support what you are saying, so I think you are probably correct.
What I found below makes it sound to me like it has to be intentional, because it says "fouling to prevent" but I found a lot more sites that support what you are saying, so I think you are probably correct.
As an SID, I have heard from more than a few officials a comment to the PA guy if he used the word intentional.
I am just pointing out that a flagrant 1should have been assessed regardless if the refs felt it was intentional
Should have been a foul but no way it was intentional...just let it go and hope he is ready for tomorrow
I don’t think there was anything intentional but a foul should have been called.
After that and Bagley last year though, I’m all for a Duke player “unintentionally” poking an opponents eye...
After that and Bagley last year though, I’m all for a Duke player “unintentionally” poking an opponents eye...
It wasn't intentional, IMO. But the refs should absolutely be reamed out for not calling a foul on that play. Zion could've been seriously hurt!
I don't see how anybody could think that was intentional. I've never seen the Ol 3 stooges poke in the eye during a basketball during live play. Heck, I'd be afraid I would break or jam a finger.
It was a basketball play, but with the emphasis on staying away from the head, there’s no way that can’t be called a Flagrant 1. Doesn’t change any outcome of the game, but it at least shows continuity on what they’ve been calling Flagrant 1 fouls. They’ve called Flagrant 1’s for a lot less.
So you’re saying they should have reviewed it? If so that i agree with.
I don’t think it was intentional. But I agree with those questioning why the play wasn’t stopped. I thought that unless it’s a fast break they’ll stop play for an injured player.
It turned into a fast break.
I was fine play wasn’t immediately stopped. It shouldn’t have been. But I’m not fine with a foul not being called.
Lastly, I did think the play merited a review simply for the fact of how hard Zion hit the floor. I also think the flagrant rules are stupid. That wasn’t my definition of flagrant.
My biggest weakness is often times being too wordsy. What you said is how I feel precisely.
I still say we should just get belly putters and everything inside the leather is good!!
Wasn’t close to intentional but it was a foul. Most of the people who think it was are either Stans or people who have never played competitive basketball. You drive and someone reaches for the ball then you have a decent chance of getting poked in the eye or slapped. Have to look at it at regular game speed not slow motion
Exactly
Even playing rec league with my buddies it's happened to me numerous times...and I can guarantee none of them were intentional
Just part of the game and it happens
I noticed that a while ago...hope he can play but if not 100% play it safe...I want him there Saturday against the hoos
Supposedly he didn’t play because of double vision, but in the locker room after the game the vision was back. Could be dealing with a corner scratch or something, but I doubt it’s anything that would keep him out Tuesday.
I’m just glad it wasn’t the orbital.
Yep. Anytime someone’s hair is out of place they review it. Because a guy went down holding his face, you’d think they’d take a second GD peekaboo.
This was on espn website yesterday...looked kinda bad
If that happened to Luke Maye, Swofford would have made sure Forrest was deported.
I'm not worried about Tuesday I'm worried about Monday since that's when the next game is haha just kidding
I think it could go along way if the league and/or the official just steps up and say "hey, it should have been called a foul and reviewed, but it was incidental" or "we did not call a foul as it we felt it was incidental, but it should have been reviewed."
Regardless of your actual feeling on whether "intentional" (technically no such thing anymore) or a foul, this needs to be addressed because that should have been reviewed.
Either shame on Duke's bench for not asking for a review (highly unlikely) or MUCH SHAME on the official (more likely, but do not recall a ref ever declining to go to the monitor if asked unless it is not reviewable in D1. Now in D3...) for not reviewing it.
But it is clear that this somehow be addressed.
Regardless of your actual feeling on whether "intentional" (technically no such thing anymore) or a foul, this needs to be addressed because that should have been reviewed.
Either shame on Duke's bench for not asking for a review (highly unlikely) or MUCH SHAME on the official (more likely, but do not recall a ref ever declining to go to the monitor if asked unless it is not reviewable in D1. Now in D3...) for not reviewing it.
But it is clear that this somehow be addressed.