From the original play:
A1 stumbles to regain her balance, and is standing about 8 feet from B3, looking at her leg and whining about getting bumped. A1 meantime, is slowly recovering her wits, finally gets up and starts to head up (down?) the floor. As she runs past A1, A1 reaches out and hits her. It was calculated, cold-blooded vengeance. Except that it was so poorly aimed and so incredibly lame, I'm not sure B3 even knew it happened. I whistled it dead, and called.....
Assuming it's B3 who recovers her wits
I thought we could reread this. A1 "reaches out and hits" in "calculated, cold-blooded vengeance." Has anyone else here seen a hard foul (or attempted hard foul) that would not qualify as a fight but would qualify as calculated vengeance?
I've seen it a few times, whether the vengeance is personal (going after a specific player) or general (going after whoever has the ball or happens to be near) it doesn't necessarily call for a flagrant.
I see Juulie's post here as indicative of her reasoning. It was obviously intentional, and it was obviously not related to the play. She was just mad she got touched by an opponent, and tried to hit an opponent. Nothing about a "punch" or "slap" here (although "slap" doesn't necessarily warrant a flagrant either.)
Frankly, unless the "punch" is obvious, I'm not whistling it. By Juulie's post, it's far from obvious.