Quote:
Originally Posted by Lah Me
CASE BOOK PLAY 10.4.5 SITUATION A!!!
10.4.5 SITUATION A: Post players A1 and B1 begin punching each other and play is stopped.....
RULING: A1 and B1 are charged with flagrant fouls and are disqualified, but no free throws result from the double PERSONAL flagrant fouls.
NFHS rule 4-19-4 says "A flagrant foul may be a personal or technical foul of a violent or savage nature, or a technical non-contact foul which displays unacceptable conduct. If personal, it involves, but is not limited to violent contact such as: striking, kicking and kneeing."
NFHS rule 4-18-1 FIGHTING says "Fighting is a flagrant act and can occur while the ball is dead or LIVE. Fighting includes but is not limited to combative acts such as an attempt to STRIKE, punch or kick an opponent with a fist, hands, arms, legs or feet regardless of whether contact is made."
Flagrant contact while the ball is live = a flagrant personal foul. That includes striking an opponent, which by definition is fighting.
How much more definitive do you want the FED to be? And how much more ridiculous can it be for people to claim that TWO case plays are wrong and their own personal vision of the way things ought to be is correct?
Silly monkies!
Lah me..... 
|
Either JR is alive or Hell has another resident here, I think. Again we have a case play which mentions fighting as a double personal foul in passing. 10-4-5 actually deals with
leaving the bench during a fight, not with the fight itself.
10-3....Player Technical 10-3-8:A player shall not be charged with fighting.
This rule directly states that fighting is a technical foul, does it not?
Is there a rule which directly states that fighting is a personal foul?