Personal Or Technical ???

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

It's an IP. Somewhere there's a case that states something like, "Is it possible for a player in control of the ball to commit a foul that's not a PC? Yes, it could be an IP, a FP or a T."

Already knew it, but wanted a citation, and also wanted to continue the discussion comparing generic dictionary adjectives with NFHS rulebook definitions.

Originally Posted by Altor

... a common foul is a personal foul that is neither flagrant nor intentional. And a player control foul is defined as a common foul. So, if the player with player control commits a flagrant or intentional foul, that foul cannot be common and therefore cannot be a PC foul.

Good explanation.

Originally Posted by Raymond

... Intentional Foul, as others have pointed out. You're thinking way too hard.

Probably am.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

He is arguing with himself again, that is all.

Bingo.

Originally Posted by bucky

Perhaps NFHS Case 4.19.6 Situation B? Is it possible for airborne shooter A1 to commit a foul which would not be player control? RULING: Yes. The airborne shooter could be charged with an intentional or flagrant personal foul or with a technical foul.

Nice citation, thanks bucky.