I can completely see why flops, as we saw in the Harvard game, are almost impossible to officiate. You are trying to judge, in real time, whether the contact was significant enough to actually cause the 240 pound dude to go flying.

I don't watch that much NBA regular season "games". Does anyone have an opinion as to whether it is helping?

At the risk of beating a dead horse, I shall repeat my take on this NBA rule.

If a ref sees a flop--i.e., a player deliberately falling or faking he has been knocked backward--why not just let the game play on? The act puts the flopping team in a vulnerable position, so let the other team use this to its advantage.

It is not as though the ref blows his whistle and then retreats to watch replay to determine if there has been a flop. And if this were how such a call was made, it would be absurd.

The game, college or pro, needs to maintain its rhythm. More whistle blowing is detrimental.

Pardon my rant. I don't know the answer to the question you pose.

Go Bears!

south bender;842053034 said:

---

At the risk of beating a dead horse, I shall repeat my take on this NBA rule.

If a ref sees a flop--i.e., a player deliberately falling or faking he has been knocked backward--why not just let the game play on? The act puts the flopping team in a vulnerable position, so let the other team use this to its advantage.

It is not as though the ref blows his whistle and then retreats to watch replay to determine if there has been a flop. And if this were how such a call was made, it would be absurd.

The game, college or pro, needs to maintain its rhythm. More whistle blowing is detrimental.

Pardon my rant. I don't know the answer to the question you pose.

Go Bears!

---

I think it gets at deterrence. I think the refs said that flopping makes the game MUCH harder to call. I can see why. And the "advantage" that is gained is good but not great. Frankly would like to see not the fines but a 2 shot T. THAT would start to get the defenders to stop it.