Quote:
Originally posted by ronny mulkey
Quote:
Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Quote:
Originally posted by bob jenkins
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.
|
Bob:
If A1 pokes B1 in the chest, that is most certainly an intentional personal foul, at the very least, by A1; remember illegal contact while the ball is live is a personal foul. It is not incidental contact. If B1 were to retaliate, then A1's actions would be considered fighting; A1 and B1 are each charged with a flagrant technical foul (this is a double technical foul) and both A1 and B1 are disqualified for fighting.
MTD, Sr.
|
MTD,
So, if B1 does not respond to A1's poke in the chest, then you are going to allow A1 to poke B1 4 more times before you DQ A1? How many times are you going to let B1 poke A1 in the chest? Until A1 responds so that you can call fighting? That could lead to a lot of chest pokings and the reason is because you are trying to fit this act into the "you can't rule technical if there is contact during a live ball" statement,instead of treating it as an unsporting technical. Penalize the act and forget the contact. Stop borderline acts early. Don't let yourself get boxed in because you were not willing to exercise your unsporting T option.
Again, IMHO.
Mulk
|
Ronny:
I am probably going to regret asking this question, but here goes. Do you think that I am not going to put air my whistle the first time A1 intentionally pokes B1 in the chest? Of course I am. Why would I let A1 continually intentionally poke B1 in the chest? You are over analyzing this play.
The best advice I can give you is that if you cannot explain your call, then don't make it.
You are not listening to what I am saying because you want to make an interpretation that cannot be defended by rule, which would make it almost impossible to explain. In otherwords: Know your definitions and apply them accordingly.
Also, please go back to my post in this thread on Feb. 25, 2005, at 10:22pm, and answer my question concerning flagrant fouls.
MTD, Sr.