Flagrant Misconduct? You Decide

With about 3 minutes remaining in the second period of the quarterfinal game between Hungary and the USA, Ben Hallock was rewarded with an exclusion at center. His defender started holding his face and claiming injury, and the ball was pulled out for a VAR review. The result of the review was a reversal of the exclusion, a flagrant misconduct called against Ben Hallock, and a penalty shot and four minute extra player advantage.

Ultimately, this wasn’t the sole factor in the US losing the game. Despite brilliant effort from many players and multiple chances, the US fell 13-12 after missing 3 penalty shots in the second half. See the article below for my thoughts on how the US has a penalty problem:

However, just as Tony Azevedo said during the game, I don’t think the flagrant misconduct call is what VAR is for and if that is a flagrant misconduct then you could call almost anything one. Also, it troubles me that this is at least the second time where I’ve seen a player rewarded for emphasizing an injury and causing a stoppage in play leading to a VAR review. If that is all it takes to get a call overturned in your favor and the best player on the opposite team kicked out for the game, it seems to encourage players to simulate in this manner because of how often contact occurs.

So, I’ve (very poorly) linked some videos that show the incident below for those who may not have Peacock as well as the text of the rules about flagrant misconducts. You tell me what you see. Is this a good call? Is this what VAR is for? Is there malicious intent in Hallock’s action? How do you determine that and how did the officials?

Until next time, keep thinking water polo.