Anstey is correct. He flops nearly everytime someone contests one of his shots!

Don't throw stones in glass house's Chris! There are a few of us still around that remember the big flops you use to do back in the day!

Ironic coming from one of the floppiest softest big men to ever play in this league. Watch the replay one hundred times and youll see a clear foul one hundred times.

Can people confirm that Dunigan was issued with a technical foul in yesterday's Perth v Adelaide game because the referee thought he flopped?

It's the first time I've witnessed it at a game if it was the case.

No, it was Wagstaff, and it was a terrible decision. Not only was Wagstaff entitled to try and draw a foul off someone who barrels in to the middle of his chest, he has also set an unrealistic precedent for every ref for the rest of the season.

He had no business calling a tech on that play.

Not sure if it was Dunigan, but there was one tech called against Perth which Brett & Carfino thought was for flopping.

They spoke about it at length, sayng there wasnt even a warning given etc, but I thought it was because Perth fouled us before the inbound pass was made and had nothing to do with a flop.

Its not a tech foul if you foul before the ball has been inbounded. Its an USF in the final two minutes of the game (or each quarter?) but there was several minutes to go anyway.

Or alternately, Anstey could quit pointing fingers and being a 'victim' and actually COACH his team.

Too bad Rohan Short does all the coaching in that staff. Watch the Crocs/Tigers game right when Melb take the timeout with 10 seconds left. Rohan Short draws up a play on the board and says 'Chris, go run that'.

FACT!!!!!

At this stage it could be argued that his coaching career will be viewed as a FLOP

Someone needs to watch more ESPN Sports Science.

We need to stamp out flopping, like Mills diving when there was ZERO contact, or Bruce clutching his eye when their was ZERO facial contact.

Selling a call (within reason) is not flopping and its not for the ref to decide that one play is going to be called differently to many other plays that occur during the season, and have done for many seasons.

What happens next week when another player takes the same dive and a tech isn't whistled?

That Dunigan example was a joke.

Poor dude gets absolutely steamrolled, and the ref gives him a warning about flopping.

Given the on-the-spot judgement abilities of most NBL refs I'd feel far more comfortable with flopping being taken care of after the game with the benefit of video replays.
Refs stuff up foul calls all the time. But now we're giving them an additional thing they can stuff up - a non-foul call - and with the penalty being 2 shots plus possession the stakes are even higher with this one.

Whatever happened to just not blowing the whistle if there is no foul? If a player chooses to sit on their arse when they could have easily stayed on their feet, then their team is already at a disadvantage playing 4-on-5. Let the guy sit on his arse, refs. I'm sure the opposition will not object.

Why wasn't Hire whistled for a tech later in the game when Creek "shoved" him over? It only took one quarter of the same game to show how the inconsistency is going to effect things even more.

Thanks folks, yes it was Wagstaff. Thanks for the correction.

Calling Ts for flopping is such a slippery slope because it's based on the false assumption that all the prior, correctly-called no-calls will now be Ts.

And how often is there a correctly-called no-call in this league? Not very often...

If there is contact on a one-on-one drive situation, there is always a foul called one way or another, so I have a bad feeling that a "stamping out flopping" initiative in this league will just lead to more bad calls. You'll get guys warned for flopping who haven't flopped at all as often as you will see guys getting away with it who have clearly done the dirty deed.

If the person calling it can't see it for what it is, the degree of punishment bestowed upon the foul act won't changing anything. It might just make things murkier...

The current rules -- ie a no call for a flop -- are perfectly adequate to combat that foul odour stinking up our game, it's just the men with the whistles calling poo-poo can't smell a rose from a turd.

Four no calls in a row will get a flopper to stop: two no calls followed by two charge calls on successive identical plays will get a guy to think about the 50-50 chance he has to alter the game. And thus he will flop. Why not?

Loved both calls. Lol at MACDUB. He wasn't steamrolled. He flopped.

Wagstaff's wasn't quite as bad but it's always good to see a serial flopper get tech'd up.

Hire's flop might have been the worst of the game.