Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastshire
Yes, the rule that says excessive force is an intentional foul. It's a slam dunk (ha) that kicking a standing opponent in the arm is excessive in basketball where kicking the ball at all is illegal. That such an act is heavily penalized in soccer, where kicking the ball is legal, helps clarify for those not accustomed to the dangers of kicking opponents the level of danger B1 has put A1 in.
Failing to call an intentional foul for excessive force in this play is a complete failure of the official to provide for basic player safety.
Beyond that, it is also contact designed to neutralized an opponent's advantageous position which is also an intentional foul. It's ludicrous that we're still discussing this at all. It's no different than the bear hug from behind. There's no possibility of legally contacting the ball.
|
I'm sorry, but there's no rules basis for saying it's a slam dunk that kicking is excessive contact. By definition, that requires a level of contact that may or may not accompany a kick.
Having a "possibility of legally contacting the ball" isn't required, anywhere. Otherwise, it would be a defensive violation to kick
at the ball regardless of whether contact is made.
That said, a player kicking a ball that's being held is certainly going to be more scrutinized by me, and the bar dropped significantly for an intentional.
I just can't agree that it's an automatic.