Quote:
Originally posted by ronny mulkey
My question is why couldn't an intimidating act be an unsporting technical foul? What do you call on the player that pokes another in the chest with his finger in a menancing manner during a live ball?
Finally, are you telling me that the rules do not allow an official the flexibility to judge acts to be unsporting? As in
10.3.7 that states "this includes, but not limited to".
Mulk
|
1) An "intimidating act" could be an unsporting T.
2) The "poke" isn't "contact that prevents normal offensive or defensive manuevers" so the poke itself isn't a foul. So, here, we penalize the unsporting aspect -- T.
3) Flexibility is allowed.
In the original play, if the swing was with intent to hit / harm the other player, then it's probably a flagrant T or flagrant P (depending on whether contact was made).
If it's just a "get off of me" swing, then it's probably a violation, or PC foul (depending on whether contact was made).
(and the option for Intentional P is there for something in between.)
The rule used to be, of course, that all swings were a T. BUt the committee recognized that not all swings rise to the level of an unsporting foul, but still need to be penalized -- thus the rule change.