|
|||
Quote:
Also, the definition of fighting in R4-18-1 says "Fighting includes....an attempt to strike, punch or kick an opponent with fists, hands, arms, legs or feet regardless of whether contact is made". No mention of elbows by the NFHS in there. It's a heckuva stretch to try and call an elbow with NO retaliation fighting at any time. |
|
|||
Excessively swinging of the arms is a violation. It also has a mechanic illustrated on the signal chart provided at NFHS.
I beleive that is a current rule, I do not have my book with me perhaps someone can make a citation.
__________________
"We judge ourselves by what we feel capable of doing, while others judge us by what we have already done." Chris Z. Detroit/SE Michigan |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
I can see a difference between swinging elbows and THROWING an elbow. The first is penalized by either violation or foul (PC, intentional, or flagrant), the second could be seen as fighting if thrown and MISSED. If it lands, it's flagrant. |
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Dan Ivey Tri-City Sports Officials Asso. (TCSOA) Member since 1989 Richland, WA |
|
|||
Quote:
[/B][/QUOTE]Then why would the FED specifically separate the two- arms and elbows- in the rules if they actually meant for them to be treated the same? The language in rule 9-13 says "A player shall not excessively swing his/her arms OR elbows". The key word is "or". The intent of the "player-control", "flagrant" and "intentional" personal foul definitions are to give us alternatives to a violation when contact is actually made with the elbow. To call that contact a "fight" is just a complete stretch, imo, and I don't think that that is what the fighting rules were intended for. You are right, though, in that the language is hazy, and could possibly be interpreted in different ways. I'd just hate to see anyone call a missed elbow a "fight", even though R4-18-1 says that contact does not necessarily have to be made for a "fight" to happen. |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
Sorry for chiming in without my rules handy but it is a lazy Friday at work. I don't want to remove all doubt by opening my mouth...he he he
__________________
"We judge ourselves by what we feel capable of doing, while others judge us by what we have already done." Chris Z. Detroit/SE Michigan |
|
|||
Quote:
...and I agree with that statement %100 also JR.
__________________
Dan Ivey Tri-City Sports Officials Asso. (TCSOA) Member since 1989 Richland, WA |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
Try this play: B1 grabs A1 from behind, foul. A1 says," Get off me!" and throws his elbow back and up at B1's head, but misses. Is that not fighting under the definition of attempting to strike an opponent? For me I can't see how that is different than A1 throwing a punch. |
|
|||
I agree with that interp. Throwing one elbow toward the face is different than the excessive swinging of the elbows referred to in the rules. But an elbow to get free is kind of like a push to get free at times, and I don't think that if the push free was all tha transpired that you'd be booting somebody for fighting.
So I would just say that you need to be sure what you have before you go with the extreme call of a fighting flagrant on a thrown elbow. But if you are sure, I think you should call it. |
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
"We judge ourselves by what we feel capable of doing, while others judge us by what we have already done." Chris Z. Detroit/SE Michigan |
|
|||
Quote:
[/B][/QUOTE]The difference, imo, is the can of worms that you just opened up. Yeah, you could probably technically classify that act as a "fight" under the language of R4-18-1. If you do want to classify that as a "fight" however, that act now becomes an automatic flagrant foul plus an ejection. Now, if someone else throws an elbow that doesn't hit anyone later on in the game, it's pretty much guaranteed that you're gonna have a coach jumping up and down, pointing his finger, and hollering "FIGHT" at you. Especially if that coach's player was the one that you threw out for "fighting" earlier. Imo, you just painted yourself into a corner when it comes to how the call could be classified. I don't care what explanation you come up with trying to explain why this elbow is a violation and not a "fight", but the last one really was a "fight", you aren't gonna convince that coach. It's become a simple matter of "consistency" to them. However, if you just use R4-19-4 or R4-19-5 instead, you can then judge each separate act as to whether it was flagrant or not, without having to get into a "must eject" mode. |
Bookmarks |
|
|