Quote:
Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Somebody, anybody:
Please tell BZ to take a Valium and go back and read my posts in this thread.
MTD, Sr.
BZ:
Go back and read your first post. You made a statement that was not correct. Now read the rest of my posts. I have answered your question like I said I would and gave you an example of an intentional foul where no contact is involved. Of course the intentional foul has to be a technical foul if no contact is involved. But read your first post, you stated, and I quote you once again: "An intentional foul may or may not be a technical foul, but is ALWAYS a contact foul, 4-19-3." That is not a true statement.
MTD, Sr.
|
MTD says,"Of course an intentional foul has to be a TECHNICAL foul if there is NO CONTACT involved."
Which is EXACTLY the same thing as an intentional foul is always a contact foul, because WITHOUT IT, it is a TECHNICAL foul.
You NEVER answered ANYTHING! I asked, "Give us a situation where we penalize with an intentional foul penalty during a live ball without contact."
You gave us nothing but TECHNICAL foul penalties.
[Edited by blindzebra on Jan 10th, 2005 at 01:30 PM]