TheObserver wrote:Uh, it was called an intentional/flagrant 1. By that definition, it goes with the opposite of what you posted.
"A flagrant 1 foul involves excessive or severe contact during a live ball..."
"excessive or severe" is not the same as "intent to injure." I have never disputed the call of intentional (or Flagrant 1) foul. The contact was, indeed, excessive. That doesn't mean it was with intent to injure. He made excessive contact without an attempt to play the ball. Clear Flagrant 1 foul.
TheObserver wrote:I realize this was probably the most exciting event in Bradley basketball in the last 10 years and is spurring some sore reactions but let's first think about what started all of this in the first place. And then let's look at it from the Marshall angle. A kid could have potentially injured a guy on purpose in a 30 point beatdown. He reacted like 99% of any caring, fatherly figure would in that situation.
Most of this above is BS I guess to just insult our program, but whatever.
It boils down to whether or not you think Brown was "trying" to injure Willis. If you think yes, then fine, curse Brown all you want. I think the answer is no.