View Single Post
  #26 (permalink)  
Old Tue Nov 07, 2006, 02:57am
rainmaker rainmaker is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 9,466
Send a message via AIM to rainmaker
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref
Not necessarily. We've already established that no certain intent is necessary for a foul to be called flagrant. In the situation I posted earlier in this thread, I genuinely believe that the player's intent was to stop a shot, nothing more. Trouble is, he missed. He did indeed wham the shooter. Was it excessive contact, or was it of a violent or savage nature? Partner and I both had good looks, but he made one call while I would have made the other.
I feel free to say this, knowing that others will chime in if they think I am wrong. I'm not 100% sure about this, but I've always thought that a flagrant foul was something that happened out of anger or disrespect. No matter how rough, an honest attempt to play the ball should be considered as intentional at the worst.

Am I incorrect in this, Jurassic, or Tony? Can't ask Chuck, although I suppose he could e-mail me, or send a PM. Nevada? Jeff?
Reply With Quote