[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Without pulling out the rules books and casebooks let me add a few things to the thread.

First, excessively swinging the elbows without making contact was a originally a violation under both NFHS and NCAA rules. When the NFHS made it a technical foul, it was described to many intepreters as a violation as well as a technical foul, which really cannot be because you cannot have both (unless you have basket interference or goaltending on a free throw, but that is the making of a different thread).

Second, the definitions of personal fouls and technical fouls are absulutes. I know what the definition of fighting is in both NFHS and NCAA rules books. But first and foremost if the ball is live when a contact foul occurs, the foul is a personal foul, whether it is a common foul, foul committed against a player in the act of shooting, intentional, or flagrant (fighting is a flagrant foul).

I know that the technical foul reference to fighting is confusing, but it is meant to apply to players and substitutes who participate in a fight once the ball is dead. If A1 and B1 decided to trade punches while the ball is live, these fouls are personal fouls which is defined as a double personal foul (as well as flagrant fouls) and both players would be guilty of fighting. The double foul causes the ball to become dead and if any other player(s) decides to join the dance he/they would be guilty of fighting and the fighting foul would be a flagrant technical. If A1 and B1's double foul had occured while the ball was dead just change personal to technical in my description of the play.

I hope that this clears up what I originally wrote.

I would like to add a personal oppinion concerning excessively swinging ones elbows without making contact being a technical foul. When it was only a violation under NFHS rules, no one ever called the violation (I did once in a boys' H.S. varsity game during the 1985-86, no kidding), so I am confused as to why the Rules Committee would think that making it a technical foul (I called it once in a girls' H.S. varsity game during the 1997-98 season) would improve the situation. And I cannot remember ever calling the violation in a college game or a AAU girls' or AAU womens'game (AAU girls and women's use NCAA Woimen's rules). I am willing to bet dollars to donuts that if A1 is guilty of a technical foul under the NFHS rule, that the covering official is more likely to call a player control foul on A1 if B1 is so close to A1 that the covering official is the only person besides the two players who knows that there was no contact by A1 against B1.