[QUOTE=truerookie]
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee
1) I just don't see at this point why there must be retaliation for it to be considered fighting when it is clear that the pusher shoved the pushee.
2) As I read it the act itself can still be a cause for ejection in the end. Rather, it falls under 4-18-2 or 4-19-4. The pusher can take an early shower.
|
1) A "push" isn't listed in R4-18-1 as being one of the acts that are deemed as automatically being a "fighting" foul. And R4-19-2 is telling us that any unsporting act other than a "strike, punch or kick" at an opponent can also be deemed a "fighting" foul, but
only if there is retaliation to that unsporting act. Iow, a push can't be deemed "fighting" if there is no retaliation.
2) And you are reading that correctly, as per rule 4-19-4. That's the point. However, rule 4-19-4 is the applicable rule to use for a "push" without retaliation. You can't apply R4-18 and call a push as being "fighting" unless there actually is retaliation for that push.
The difference in choosing the correct rule to use is that if you try to apply rule 4-18, it means that the player
must be disqualified. It's automatic with no judgment involved. That means that
all pushes are flagrant. If you correctly use R4--19-4, you now can use your judgment as to whether the pushing act actually is flagrant or not. And I think that you will agree that not all pushes are automatically flagrant.
Make any more sense now?