Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Camron Rust
1) I saw the elbow/push as one action...made contact with the elbow/forearm and ended the contact by pushing away with the forarm. The action on the rebound appeared to not involve contact at all. There was no other apparrent contact on the video. The elbow/push was all in the same sequence, not seperate infractions.
2) If it had happened alone, would you have called it a fight? I doubt it....intentional (by your own statement), but not a fight.
3) If it had happened alone, without retaliation, would you (could you) have called a T? No. By your assertions in prior posts, live ball contact can only be a personal foul, not a technical.
4) The fighting rule says that unsporting acts can be considered fighting if they lead to a fight. However, unsporting acts are, by definition, non-contact technical fouls. That means that the actions of the elbow/push can not be an unsporting act/foul. Therefore, it can't be fighting under the retaliation clause.
5) The only way you can peg the elbow/push as fighting is if you consider it a fighting act by itself. Doing so means that any hard foul would become fighting if the fouled player takes offense.
6) Both get charged with fighting. Attempting to strike a player with a fist is far different than a elbow/push to the torso.
|
1) Camron, didn't you read the link I posted to Kansas.com? The Coulter kid admitted in that story to elbowing the other kid
before he pushed him. I really don't care what you
think you're seeing on the video. The kid flat out admitted throwing an elbow
before his push. End of story.
2) I've already posted multi-times that if the push happened alone, I would call an intentional personal foul. That's my own personal judgement after viewing the push.
3) Agree and I've already posted to that effect. That's an intentional personal foul per existing rules. Have you got a rule that you can cite that states differently?
4) Could you please cite a rules definition that says unsporting acts are by definition non-contact technical fouls? I'm certainly not aware of anything in the rules that says that. Read NFHS rule 4-19-4. It completely contradicts that statement. Or are you saying that you think that kicking or kneeing an opponent without the ball isn't an unsporting act? Also see casebook play 10.4.5SitA- that talks about a fight. Note that both players charged with fighting in that case play received flagrant personal fouls. And you are also saying that it then can't be fighting under the retaliation clause? You're kidding, right? To have fighting, it doesn't matter whether the ball is live or dead. Says so right in R4-18-
Fighting is a flagrant act and can occur when the ball is dead or live". Whatever point you're trying to make here isn't covered by any rule that I'm aware of.
5) Yup, if you consider that hard foul as instigating a fight, it suresheck does become fighting if the person that was fouled retaliated by fighting. Says so right in NFHS 4-18-2 and NCAA 4-23-3(b). Sure it's a judgement call, but I don't believe in letting a kid that started a fight just skate because he happened to get the sh!t kicked out of him.
6) I disagree vehemently. Attempting to strike somebody with a fist is no different at all, by the rules that I've cited, than pushing somebody if both acts lead directly to a fight breaking out.