Davante Out For Louisville?

[ATWizJr]

The USF kid was draped all over Davante and Davante was just trying to shake him off.  Refs should have called the USF for a foul right away and none of this would have occurred.

[StillAWarrior]

If you watch the replay of the elbowing closely, Devante swung his elbow 3 times.  He grazed the SF player with the 1st elbow swung to the rear and the SF player did not flinch.  He then swung it forward and did not hit the SF player.  Then he swung the elbow to the rear again and did not hit the SF player but the SF player flopped like a sack of dog dung.  If you looked closely at the SF player after the incident there was no blood and during the rest of the game there was no swelling.  I guarantee that if Devante had connected with a solid elbow there would have been some obvious evidence.  It was an over reaction by the officials if you ask me.

I think you and I must have very different definitions of the word "grazed."  He connected pretty well with that first elbow.  I'm on the fence about whether or not the kid "sold" it a little too hard (i.e., flopped), but I don't think there's any question that Gardner nailed the kid pretty hard.  I hope he's not suspended for Louisville, but I wouldn't be surprised...you just can't have those guys throwing elbows around like that.

[GGGG]

The USF kid was draped all over Davante and Davante was just trying to shake him off.  Refs should have called the USF for a foul right away and none of this would have occurred.

Well, they blew their whistle for *something.*  I'm not sure if it was a foul or a tie-up, but again, this is not the referees fault.  It is 100% on Davante.  You cannot swing your elbows like that.

[MileHigh]

Well, they blew their whistle for *something.*  I'm not sure if it was a foul or a tie-up, but again, this is not the referees fault.  It is 100% on Davante.  You cannot swing your elbows like that.

It could have been over the back on USF, but he was more coming over his right shoulder.  It was just a bad tangling of players.  They both fought through the whistle for the ball.  And unfortunate because we could use Ox against L'ville.

I do think the tie up with Ox at Cincy was worse than last night.  The play of the game didn't seem chippy like Cincy.

[ATWizJr]

Well, they blew their whistle for *something.*  I'm not sure if it was a foul or a tie-up, but again, this is not the referees fault.  It is 100% on Davante.  You cannot swing your elbows like that.

As is sometimes the case, they waited too long then whistled the second incident.

[GGGG]

As is sometimes the case, they waited too long then whistled the second incident.

The flagrant foul nullifies the first incident.  Why are people insistent on blaming the refs for this?  You simply cannot do what he did.  Period.

[MU82]

This has been a point of emphasis for NCAA officials in recent years:

"When a player extends his elbows outside his shoulders, or when he swings his elbows at a speed faster than that of his pivoting motion, a referee is required to call a foul. While this swinging motion of the elbows is often used to create separation from a defender, a referee is obligated to call the foul regardless of whether or not contact is made. The consequences for elbow contact become even more severe when excessive elbow contact is made, resulting in an intentional or flagrant foul."

Technically, Davante could have been called for a foul just for swinging his elbows as violently as he did, even if he never made contact. In fact, this is rarely called in college games (though more often called in high school). The fact that he made contact made the flagrant a no-brainer. There is precedent for him getting suspended and also precedent for him not getting suspended. Obviously, we're all hoping for the latter from the Big East.

[ATWizJr]

The flagrant foul nullifies the first incident.  Why are people insistent on blaming the refs for this?  You simply cannot do what he did.  Period.

Why? Because if the refs act in a timely manner, the second incident does not occur.

[GGGG]

Why? Because if the refs act in a timely manner, the second incident does not occur.

Do you have reading comprehension issues???  IT DOESN'T MATTER BECAUSE YOU CANNOT SWING YOUR ELBOWS EVEN IF IT TAKES FIVE MINUTES FOR THE REFS TO BLOW THEIR WHISTLE.

Stop making excuses.  He didn't have to swing his elbows to get the guy off his back.  And frankly I didn't think the whistle was slow anyway.  He got what he deserved at it was entirely his fault.

This has been a point of emphasis for NCAA officials in recent years:

"When a player extends his elbows outside his shoulders, or when he swings his elbows at a speed faster than that of his pivoting motion, a referee is required to call a foul. While this swinging motion of the elbows is often used to create separation from a defender, a referee is obligated to call the foul regardless of whether or not contact is made. The consequences for elbow contact become even more severe when excessive elbow contact is made, resulting in an intentional or flagrant foul."

Technically, Davante could have been called for a foul just for swinging his elbows as violently as he did, even if he never made contact. In fact, this is rarely called in college games (though more often called in high school). The fact that he made contact made the flagrant a no-brainer. There is precedent for him getting suspended and also precedent for him not getting suspended. Obviously, we're all hoping for the latter from the Big East.

Exactly!!

[ATWizJr]

Do you have reading comprehension issues???  IT DOESN'T MATTER BECAUSE YOU CANNOT SWING YOUR ELBOWS EVEN IF IT TAKES FIVE MINUTES FOR THE REFS TO BLOW THEIR WHISTLE.

Stop making excuses.  He didn't have to swing his elbows to get the guy off his back.  And frankly I didn't think the whistle was slow anyway.  He got what he deserved at it was entirely his fault.



Exactly!!

Point is, if the whistle blows on time, Davante doesn't swing his elbows.  Awaiting your next personal attack, though.

[MU82]

 Point is, if the whistle blows on time, Davante doesn't swing his elbows.  Awaiting your next personal attack, though.

You don't know that. What if the ref blows his whistle "on time" but the defender keeps clawing at Davante, who gets pissed and still throws his elbows?

The one and only thing we know is that Davante threw his elbows up around an opponent's head, which is clearly against the rules whether it came before the whistle, during the whistle or after the whistle. Jeesh, does it always have to be the ref's "fault"?

[GGGG]

 Point is, if the whistle blows on time, Davante doesn't swing his elbows.  

It is completely irrelevant when the ref blew his whistle.  He cannot throw his elbows like that.  If the refs fail to blow their whistle in a prompt manner, can he punch the guy?  Kick him?

Of course he can't...and he can't throw his elbows either.  It's a f*cking rule.

[ATWizJr]

You don't know that. What if the ref blows his whistle "on time" but the defender keeps clawing at Davante, who gets pissed and still throws his elbows?

The one and only thing we know is that Davante threw his elbows up around an opponent's head, which is clearly against the rules whether it came before the whistle, during the whistle or after the whistle. Jeesh, does it always have to be the ref's "fault"?

If the whistle comes on time and then Davante throws his elbows then Davante would be at fault.  However, I think that if the whistle had blown on time and the proper first foul assessed, there would have been no elbowing.

[ATWizJr]

It is completely irrelevant when the ref blew his whistle.  He cannot throw his elbows like that.  If the refs fail to blow their whistle in a prompt manner, can he punch the guy?  Kick him?

Of course he can't...and he can't throw his elbows either.  It's a f*cking rule.

Never said that the late whistle justified the elbow throwing.  Nothing justifies elbow throwing.  Said that a prompt whistle would have preempted the incident.

[Dr. Blackheart]

Any one remember Teddy Valentine's non-call AFTER review against Florida in the NCAA's when Jamil got clocked?  This was less than that as both were going hard for the ball.  Yet, the rule is clear...DG should have got tossed.  However, both players were playing through the end of the whistle and then some as they were taught by their coaches...including taking a dive.  Was it intentional or excessive?  No..so hard to believe there will be a game exclusion as well.

[TJ]

Any one remember Teddy Valentine's non-call AFTER review against Florida in the NCAA's when Jamil got clocked?  This was less than that as both were going hard for the ball.  Yet, the rule is clear...DG should have got tossed.  However, both players were playing through the end of the whistle and then some as they were taught by their coaches...including taking a dive.  Was it intentional or excessive?  No..so hard to believe there will be a game exclusion as well.

He didn't take a dive.  Just because there was a delay between the contact and the reaction in super-slow motion doesn't mean the guy took a dive.  He got hit in the face by Ox's elbow and he fell down, as most people would do in that situation.

[Aughnanure]

The flagrant foul nullifies the first incident.  Why are people insistent on blaming the refs for this?  You simply cannot do what he did.  Period.

Because that's a ridiculous statement. He can't do that? Now we can't fight for the ball and we call anything that is a fast movement "violent"? Plus we have to have these automatic ejection and suspension rules because refs can't be trusted to make these judgement calls, so every little thing has to be decided by a way too specific rulebook situation.

You can't just say "he can't do that" without acknowledging the legitimate criticism at refs for being extremely inconsistent in how they let physical contact into games. But then drawing a ridiculously hard line about one play. He used his elbows to separate, he didn't punch him. Performing fast movements is not a synonym for "violent" and I'm sick of everyone saying refs can't be blamed for anything when it's their job to not allow a big scrum for the ball that ALWAYS leads to a move light Davante just did. What Davante did was no different than what EVERY player does when they get bombarded by a bunch opponents' hand checking, grabbing of their arms, pushing them off their pivot foot and finally reaching for the ball and pushing their elbows inside their chest to separate.

[Coleman]

 

If the whistle comes on time and then Davante throws his elbows then Davante would be at fault.  However, I think that if the whistle had blown on time and the proper first foul assessed, there would have been no elbowing.

That's the most messed up reasoning I've ever heard. You can't omit making a call because something hypothetically should have gone a different way. It was the right call. End of story. Arguing otherwise makes yourself and this board look foolish.

Don't think it warrants a suspension but won't be surprised if that's what ends up happening. 50/50 in my opinion.

[jsglow]

My instincts tell me that DG will be playing on Sunday.  Based on the rules he absolutely needed to be ejected but I suspect that the BEast will judge his intent.  He was trying to get the guy off of him, not necessarily clock him in the jaw.  In my mind, that factor (intent) is what must ultimately separate an intentional punch or intentional cheap shot elbow (worthy of suspension) and a heat of the moment 'get off me dammit' reaction.  I guess we'll see.

[Golden Avalanche]

Because that's a ridiculous statement. He can't do that? Now we can't fight for the ball and we call anything that is a fast movement "violent"? Plus we have to have these automatic ejection and suspension rules because refs can't be trusted to make these judgement calls, so every little thing has to be decided by a way too specific rulebook situation.

You can't just say "he can't do that" without acknowledging the legitimate criticism at refs for being extremely inconsistent in how they let physical contact into games. But then drawing a ridiculously hard line about one play. He used his elbows to separate, he didn't punch him. Performing fast movements is not a synonym for "violent" and I'm sick of everyone saying refs can't be blamed for anything when it's their job to not allow a big scrum for the ball that ALWAYS leads to a move light Davante just did. What Davante did was no different than what EVERY player does when they get bombarded by a bunch opponents' hand checking, grabbing of their arms, pushing them off their pivot foot and finally reaching for the ball and pushing their elbows inside their chest to separate.

Jay Bilas has used every platform available at ESPN over the past fortnight discussing just how inconsistent officiating has become in college basketball. Not only is it leading to dangerous physical situations for kids but Bilas also believes it has become a primary reason why we're seeing offensive execution fall to such a low level.

[GGGG]

Because that's a ridiculous statement. He can't do that? Now we can't fight for the ball and we call anything that is a fast movement "violent"? Plus we have to have these automatic ejection and suspension rules because refs can't be trusted to make these judgement calls, so every little thing has to be decided by a way too specific rulebook situation.

You can't just say "he can't do that" without acknowledging the legitimate criticism at refs for being extremely inconsistent in how they let physical contact into games. But then drawing a ridiculously hard line about one play. He used his elbows to separate, he didn't punch him. Performing fast movements is not a synonym for "violent" and I'm sick of everyone saying refs can't be blamed for anything when it's their job to not allow a big scrum for the ball that ALWAYS leads to a move light Davante just did. What Davante did was no different than what EVERY player does when they get bombarded by a bunch opponents' hand checking, grabbing of their arms, pushing them off their pivot foot and finally reaching for the ball and pushing their elbows inside their chest to separate.

 
It's simple.

You can't punch a guy...you can't kick a guy....you can't throw an elbow that lands above the shoulders.  It's a rule.

Hardly ridiculous.  

[MUfan12]

 
It's simple.

You can't punch a guy...you can't kick a guy....you can't throw an elbow that lands above the shoulders.  It's a rule.

Hardly ridiculous.  

The problem with this is it implies intent. I just have a hard time throwing a guy out of a game for an elbow that would have hit a taller guy in the chest. If it's clear they're aiming above the shoulders, that's one thing.

[ATWizJr]

That's the most messed up reasoning I've ever heard. You can't omit making a call because something hypothetically should have gone a different way. It was the right call. End of story. Arguing otherwise makes yourself and this board look foolish.

Don't think it warrants a suspension but won't be surprised if that's what ends up happening. 50/50 in my opinion.

If this is the most messed up reasoning you've ever heard you have led a sheltered life.  This entire argument is based on hypotheticals as is much of the discussion on this, or any other sports forum.  

Look at it this way, its' a close game.  both teams are playing hard, both players are intensely battling for a loose ball.  The larger, stronger player has possession and position.  However, the opponent is draped over his shoulder/back and continues to harass and bang the bigger guy.  An aware ref immediately recognizes the situation and blows the whistle for a foul on the offending player.  Satisfied that he is being protected, the bigger guy starts walking to the line to the line to shoot FT's.  Timely whistle, no need for the big guy to try to protect/possess the rock, no flagrant foul on the big guy.  End of story.

[robmufan]

TWITTER TRACKER!!!

MarquetteMBB ‏@MarquetteMBB
League officials reviewed Davante Gardner play vs. USF. Play was officiated correctly on court. No additional penalty. #mubb

[GGGG]

The problem with this is it implies intent. I just have a hard time throwing a guy out of a game for an elbow that would have hit a taller guy in the chest. If it's clear they're aiming above the shoulders, that's one thing.

You can call the rule ridiculous and I wouldn't have much of an argument.  However it is a rule that was applied correctly.  And Davante should know that.