Quote:
Originally posted by ronny mulkey
MTD,
I think that most elbow plays should be treated as an excessive elbow. But, there are plays where the act should be penalized. I think you see excessive elbow and I see an intimidating act. Billy Bad *** has just thrown an elbow that did not connect. My point is that not all acts involving an elbow has to be classified as an excessive elbow. If the entire play does not result in contact, then you could have an intimidating elbow that you are only going to treat as a violation? And, that's because you only want to put it into a category (excessive elbow) that might not fit every time.
If I take my elbow (no swing) and put it up under your chin in a menancing threatening manner (not roughly, not much contact)then you would not have any call?
Again, I see this particular play as much worse than poking a finger in my chest, pushing me off because of frustration, or even taunting. Unsporting technical is an option afforded me by 4-19-13.
Mulk
|
Ronny:
Go back and read all of NFHS R4-S19. You will see definitions of the two major categories of fouls: personal and technical. Personal fouls are of four types: common fouls (including player control fouls), intentional fouls, flagrant fouls, and fouls that are committed against a player in the act of shooting. Technical fouls are also are also can be intentional, flagrant, and those that are neither intentional nor flagrant. Unsportsmanlike fouls are also defined. The technical foul section of Rule 10 also gives more information concerning what are technical fouls.
The situation you described: A1 swinging his elbow and missing B1 is not that same as A1 swinging his elbow and NOT missing B1. In the later, A1 is guilty of a personal foul: common (player control), intentional, or flagrant. In the former, the official has to decide if A1's act is a violation (excessively swinging his elbows), and I should add here that excessively swinging one's elbows without making contact was made an infraction (orginally a violation in both NFHS and NCAA, then a technical foul in NFHS and still a violation in NCAA, and then back to a violation in both NFHS and NCAA) because it was an act that would intimidate a defender from attempting to play defense for fear of getting hit by the offensive player's elbows. If, in the official's judgement, A1 was attempting to hit B1 in the face with his elbow but missed, then A1 is guilty of a flagrant technical foul. My question to you is to tell the group why this is a flagrant technical foul.
MTD, Sr.