I think if this was your daughter, you would feel differently. A cross check into an attacker's back as she is in the shooting motion with the ball nearly out of her stick is "not malicious"? Are you kidding? The defender was beaten and got a cheap shot in on her back. Attacker was completely defenseless. Stony Brook better call Saul. Completely disagree that this is a normal play in the women's game. Sorry but I still dont see what you are describing, did you watch the video? Looks like she makes contact about the time the ball is released and its not in the back . I see a loose ball and player picking it up and shooting and a defender being moving as fast as they can to disrupt the shot . To say the defender was giving a cheap shot because she got beat is ridiculous . Yes its a foul but not even sure it deserves a yellow card. Hopefully the kid makes a full recovery but to go after the defender the way some are is just pathetic.I think if the defender were your daughter you would feel differently.
My options on this
1) Was it a foul? Clearly yes 2) Was it Malicious? No reason to believe that it is 3) Should it have been a card? By the rules, yes. But many similar things are not called. 4) The ambulance situation is completely undependable, especially when a hospital is so close. While not JS's fault someone's head should roll in athletic department.
However, what rubs a lot of people the wrong way, including me, is the StonyBrook's lack of empathy for the situation. No get well soon messages. No Acknowledge at all. JS's press conference saying they didn't have a killer instinct post-game was one of the most tone deaf things I have ever seen.
Reply
Quote