Flagrant or Regular "T"?

[rfp]

3rd quarter of a close, well contested boys game. Player A1 has ball in the corner. B1 comes out to guard him and bumps A1 causing him to be knocked backwards. I blow whistle and call personal foul on B1. A1 overreacts to the foul and retaliates by shoving B1. I call A1 with a flagrant technical and eject him. False double foul, A1's substitute shoots a 1-1, followed by team B shooting 2 for the "T" plus the ball.

"A" coach agrees with the call, but it got me thinking. Would you have called this shove a flagrant "T" or should I have possibly considered it a non-flagrant "T"? A thrown punch is a definite flagrant, but what about a shove? What guidelines do you use?

[joseph2493]

Originally posted by rfp
3rd quarter of a close, well contested boys game. Player A1 has ball in the corner. B1 comes out to guard him and bumps A1 causing him to be knocked backwards. I blow whistle and call personal foul on B1. A1 overreacts to the foul and retaliates by shoving B1. I call A1 with a flagrant technical and eject him. False double foul, A1's substitute shoots a 1-1, followed by team B shooting 2 for the "T" plus the ball.

"A" coach agrees with the call, but it got me thinking. Would you have called this shove a flagrant "T" or should I have possibly considered it a non-flagrant "T"? A thrown punch is a definite flagrant, but what about a shove? What guidelines do you use?

I'm not sure how to answer:

Saturday morning I had a game between two teams from schools' for the deaf. In the last minutes of the game I had a held ball situation, where obviously they could not hear the whistle. One of the players saw me and let go, the other took the oppurtunity to swing at the first (there was no contact made). I blew the T with full intent of ejecting the player as I approached the table. When I got to the table to report the T, the coach asked what his player had done. As I told him he turned to his assistant and said to get him out of there "he just finished his career on this team." I decided not to give the flagrant and just issued an unsportsmanlike, considering the coach seemed to actually take appropriate action. The boy left the court not to be seen again. After the game the AD came to me to apologize, and with the help of an interpreter, informed me the boy had just came off a three game suspension, and she believed he would not play again.

I think with your shove a fight could have broken out which I would said constitutes a flagrant. A shove is a little more than taunting.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

You have three courses of action, all of which are technical fouls:

1) A1's push was so violent that it has to be ruled flagrant.

2) A1's push was an attempt to start a fight even if B1 does not respond, which is a flagrant technical foul for fighting.

3) A1's push was simplying unsportsmanlike conduct, which means the technical foul is not flagrant but could be intentional.

In all three cases, you have a false double foul. Under NFHS Rules the fouls are penalized in the order they occur. Under NCAA Men's/Women's Rules the technical foul is penalized at the Point of Interruption, and then the personal foul is penalized.

MTD, Sr.

[ChuckElias]

rfp, this is probably a situation that I'd have to see to give you a real strong opinion. But without seeing it, I would generally say that a shove is not flagrant, unless it's directed at a player's head. A hard push like that is just that, a hard push. There's probably no intent to injure, and it's not so outlandish that I'd consider it to be extreme or vicious. Having said that, if you tell me that you thought it was extreme or vicious, then I would back you 100%.

Joseph, I also agree with your decision. No need to pile on with the flagrant, since he was clearly done for the night (if not the season).

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Under NCAA Men's/Women's Rules the technical foul is penalized at the Point of Interruption, and then the personal foul is penalized.

MTD, Sr.

Not if the T was flagrant.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by bob jenkins

Not if the T was flagrant.

Even if it was non-flagrant, under NCAAM rules, it would still be an intentional technical. Therefore, you don't use the POI. The offended team will get possession for the dead ball contact.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

Even if it was non-flagrant, under NCAAM rules, it would still be an intentional technical. Therefore, you don't use the POI. The offended team will get possession for the dead ball contact.

Bob and Chuck:

Thanks for pointing out the nonsense that POI and all the other foolishness that the NCAA has brought to its rules code.

MTD, Sr.

[Dudly]

Joseph2493....

I've got to ask because I have never seen this, how do the players know a whistle has blown? Do the lights flash?, are there spotters placed along the court to signal a whistle?

Dudly

[joseph2493]

Originally posted by Dudly
Joseph2493....

I've got to ask because I have never seen this, how do the players know a whistle has blown? Do the lights flash?, are there spotters placed along the court to signal a whistle?

Dudly

The have more of a tendancy to watch your arm movements.

The coaches told me they can tell when the players stop running and lookup for the referee or the clock.

The particular gym had no lights, but I imagine some do.

It was very interesting to officiate, I've called when one side of the ball was deaf, but this was a first to have both.

The coaches are pretty good about waiving their arms trying to get their attention when you tweet.

And the obvious is when everyone else stops so do they.

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by joseph2493

The have more of a tendancy to watch your arm movements.

The coaches told me they can tell when the players stop running and lookup for the referee or the clock.

The particular gym had no lights, but I imagine some do.

It was very interesting to officiate, I've called when one side of the ball was deaf, but this was a first to have both.

The coaches are pretty good about waiving their arms trying to get their attention when you tweet.

And the obvious is when everyone else stops so do they.

Not all deaf are completely deaf. Some can detect extremely loud sounds but not moderate or soft sounds. I worked a game where one of the players was considered deaf but was told he could hear the whistle sometimes...but not to expect him to hear our voices.

I just made extra sure that my signals were even more clear...held them a little longer than normal....to make sure he had a chance to see them if he desired.

[joseph2493]

Originally posted by Camron Rust

Not all deaf are completely deaf. Some can detect extremely loud sounds but not moderate or soft sounds. I worked a game where one of the players was considered deaf but was told he could hear the whistle sometimes...but not to expect him to hear our voices.

I just made extra sure that my signals were even more clear...held them a little longer than normal....to make sure he had a chance to see them if he desired.

There is no doubt that some of them could hear. But, 9 out of 10 players could not. You hold the signal until they see you and with the help of the other players they stop fairly rapidly (normally)