Wadda you got?

[justacoach]

Sitch.....
Both teams in bonus
A1 controls rebound and is called for "Excessive Swinging of Elbows" based on official's mechanic when reporting foul.
How do you penalize this???

Forgive the simplistic question, I'm ....

[ref18]

Excessive swinging of the elbows is not a foul. If I called that, I'd give the ball to B at the closest spot out of bounds.

[justacoach]

It was (corredtly) deemed a foul as the axis of movement was the shoulders, not full body movement.
Conceding it was indeed a foul, what penalty would you invoke??

[Mark Padgett]

Was there contact with the opponent? This is a determining factor.

[ref18]

no contact = no foul

[justacoach]

yes,contact. Foul called correctly, with even the correct mechanic, as stipulated in my original post.

How do you penalize this foul??

[Edited by justacoach on Jul 9th, 2004 at 12:21 AM]

[Snake~eyes]

If A1 has the ball its a player control foul. Give B the ball.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by justacoach
yes,contact. Foul called correctly, with even the correct mechanic, as stipulated in my original post.

How do you penalize this foul??

Coach, if a foul was called, then the "swinging the elbows" signal was the wrong signal. That signal is for a violation only, not a foul. The correct signal for a foul would be the hand-behind-the-head player control foul signal. If you deemed the elbow as excessive contact of a violent nature, you could call the contact a flagrant personal foul too, but that one is usually reserved for the cases where the elbow gets up in the head or face of the defender, and you think that it's deliberate.

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Coach, if a foul was called, then the "swinging the elbows" signal was the wrong signal. That signal is for a violation only, not a foul. The correct signal for a foul would be the hand-behind-the-head player control foul signal. If you deemed the elbow as excessive contact of a violent nature, you could call the contact a flagrant personal foul too, but that one is usually reserved for the cases where the elbow gets up in the head or face of the defender, and you think that it's deliberate.

Right on, JR. This is why I was confused by the coach's post. He insisted that the mechanic given was correct (which it wasn't), but then he didn't know what foul, and hence penalty, had been called. He should have been able to tell that by the mechanic given. If the correct mechanic had been given he would have known this info. Hopefully, he will now accept that the official gave the wrong signal and that is why he is now asking us this question.

FWIW I'll add that the foul could also have been called intentional.
When the violation was introduced to NFHS rules in the 2002-03 rules book, there was a comment on page 71 that addressed what the proper call would be if contact was made.

It says in part, "If a player makes contact with an opponent while excessively swinging the arm(s)/elbow(s), the official still has several options: a player control foul, an intentional foul or a flagrant foul. The specific call should be determined by the severity of the act and player intent (based on official's judgment)."


[Edited by Nevadaref on Jul 9th, 2004 at 04:56 AM]

[Robmoz]

no contact=no foul..........

I dont agree with this equation, an elbow can be like a punch and does not have to connect to be a foul (if you were making a blanket equation). Even with no contact you can make an USC call.



[Edited by Robmoz on Jul 9th, 2004 at 11:37 AM]

[Adam]

Originally posted by Robmoz
no contact=no foul..........

I dont agree with this equation, an elbow can be like a punch and does not have to connect to be a foul.

You can't call it a pc foul. Your scenario would be a technical foul, which is not included with the equation above.

[Damian]

I had this on another post. If there is no contact and the ball is live, you can't call it technical. You can call it flagrant and throw him out.

[devdog69]

Originally posted by Damian
I had this on another post. If there is no contact and the ball is live, you can't call it technical. You can call it flagrant and throw him out.

Actually Damian, you've got this mixed up... If there is contact and the ball is live it can't be technical, it is by definition personal, either common, intentional, or flagrant. However, if there is NO contact then it can be deemed unsportsmanlike, which is technical in nature.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by devdog69
Actually Damian, you've got this mixed up... If there is contact and the ball is live it can't be technical, it is by definition personal, either common, intentional, or flagrant. However, if there is NO contact then it can be deemed unsportsmanlike, which is technical in nature.

You cannot call a T for this act anymore.

If there is contact all you can call is a PC Foul, a Flagrant or Intentional Fouls.

If there is no contact, then all you have is a violation. They changed that rule about 2 years ago.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally posted by JRutledge

You cannot call a T for this act anymore.

If there is contact all you can call is a PC Foul, a Flagrant or Intentional Fouls.

If there is no contact, then all you have is a violation. They changed that rule about 2 years ago.

Peace

Rut,
They've gone and changed the context here. Damian and Rob are talking about fighting. If the elbow looks like a punch, you could conceivably call a flagrant T (even during a live ball) if it misses. Just as you would a failed punch.