Quote:
Originally Posted by Whistles & Stripes
First Action -- Intentional
Second Part -- Flagrant
And because the First Action incited the Second Part(reaction), the first part then ALSO becomes flagrant.
|
Someone else has set out the rule for you. The inciting act has to be unsporting before you apply that rule. An intentional foul is not automatically "unsporting." The case play is a taunt and then a punch. Both ejected fight rule. Your example, "get that outta here" -taunt. If punch follows, both ejected under fight rule. Both unsporting.
This play to me is flagrant because of the severity of the contact. This contact is so severe you can apply the unsporting aspect of the rule and eject under if you wanted to. Can't do it on every intentional foul. I grab you to stop the clock and fall on you. You get mad and punch me. Your gone. I get intentional foul only.
Rule also says it is "an attempt to instigate a fight.." That means I'm trying to do something bad/unsporting. It is more than just intentional foul + retaliation= both ejected.