HS Intentional/Flagrant VIDEO
 

Received this video from our association of a recent play and the expected adjudication (which I had when I first watched the video).

Flagrant/Intentional on the initial foul
then Flagrant/Technical for the kick

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/BKaLOfEh2Ic" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Dang. On first watching I had INT on the first foul and regular tech on the second thing but after I've seen it a few times I say toss both of them.

I really wouldn't have any issue with either intentional or flagrant personal on the first foul.

Kick is definitely a flagrant T.

00's sub will shoot two first, then any white player shoots for the T. White ball at division line.

I do wish the calling official closed in on the initial contact.

So was the expected adjudication Flagrant or Intentional on the personal foul?

I think I would have discussed with partners and probably suggested that both be flagrant. But I would have either they both flagrant or give them both a second chance.

I was surprised at how calm things were after this so maybe this looked worse on video. If the officials felt that the game was still under control with no risk of further issues, I could see going intentional and technical and moving on.

The initial foul should have been a flagrant, and same for the kick. Both should have gotten the boot.

I believe what was done in the game was INT and T.

Both gentlemen would have had the rest of the game to think about their actions as they were residing on the bench.

No such thing as a "Flagrant Intentional" foul.

It can be one or the other (or neither), but not both.

He didn't say flagrant intentional. Flagrant/Intention = pick one.

Id have to say as to the layup, what has game been like to this point? If nothing else weird or choppy, then IF seems to be in line. If it has been Rock em sock em to that point, flagrant on both.

Serious question-if both are flagrant, are they not offsetting and go to POI?


I wish I had a cool signature

I don't think that's what he meant, based on his later posts.

But if it was then it's not a choice between "Flagrant" and "Technical" in the next part of his post.

I do not have these as offsetting.

Why are so many giving the initial foul a flagrant? I can see intentional, but don't understand how you can come up with a flagrant. Reasoning?

Maybe, but I'm not sure that it would've made a difference... and if he had closed down, it would've been harder for him to see the kick.

On the initial foul, I'm initially coming up with an intentional foul. However, this foul is what caused Blue 00 to react by kicking. Because the initial foul is what caused the response by Blue 00, and that one is deemed flagrant, the act which incited the kick is also deemed flagrant.

In the end, I'm ejecting them both.