|
I have to admit I thought the T's shouldn't have offset that way. Of course, I didn't think the instigator committed three total fouls, either. I had one flagrant personal (rather than an intentional personal followed by the flagrant T) and one flagrant T (after the original fouls were reported).
So, you're saying that the following scenario:
Intentional personal on V32, followed by 1 flagrant T on V32, H22, and H42, followed after the reporting by another flagrant T on V32, should have resulted in 2 shots for H22's sub (he was the fouled party on the intentional), 2 shots for V??, and then 2 shots and the ball for H?? (for V32's parting words of wisdom)?
Assuming the state was correct in ruling the T's all offset, shouldn't we have gone to the arrow rather than give H the ball at the spot of the intentional foul?
|