Elbow during live ball

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by BktBallRef
You people are beginning to bore the he11 out of me.

Your friend buckley11 is really gonna be p1ssed at you when he gets an email telling him you're bored.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Young Man, your reading of the rules tell me that you still have a lot to learn about the rules. I do not suffer lightly officials who do not want to follow the rules or interprete the rules correctly. The logic that you are using cannot be defended. You are trying to divide a single action into two actions so you can impose a penalty that is not supported by rule. I am sorry if you do not appreaciate be spoken to in such a frank manner but any official that attempts to apply the rules in such an illogical manner is just headed for trouble. Remember, what I told you, if you cannot explain it don't call it.

MTD, Sr.

Yeah, you e-mail them with your resume.

Just because someone does not agree with you does not mean they do not know the rules and how to apply them.

If not agreeing with you meant someone should stop officiating 99% of this forum would need to hang it up.

[Daryl H. Long]

Mark, you should not run Ronnie down as it is obvious to me that he is honestly trying to find out 2 things.
1: "live ball contact can never be called a Technical foul"' Is this generic statement true?, and
2: what kind of situations would apply per rule 4-19-13. He gave some situations which include contact and asked the question "Why can't we exercise unsporting foul option afforded us per rule 4-19-13.

Answer 1: I believe the statement is true. It only seems false when we are talking actions called fighting. (More on fighting below)

Answer to 2: How to apply the definition given in rule 4-19-13 is explained in Rule 10 for teams, players, and bench personnel but the rule book also says that the rule could apply to other acts not listed.

The answer to Ronnie's question is that my only way to exclude the act as a Technical foul is to find a specific rule placing it in another category.

For Ronnies swinging the elbows question I replied earlier it is always a violation even though so agressive (or intimidating if you wish) that it would cause injury to another player if contacted and gave Rule 4-24-8 which specifically states such. A1 is guilty whether he is in player control, another teammate has the ball, or the other team is in control.

From the discussion by JR and MTD they both agree to the vagueness of what constitutes a fight and brought up several case book citations. My comments follow:

Case 4.18.2: The dunk (made basket) caused the ball to become dead so the official's whistle in this case is of no consequence. Both the taunt and the retaliatory punch were during a dead ball. And supposing the taunt by A1 was a finger pointed at B1 or even a finger poke to the chest of B1 the final ruling is still the same. Fight per 4-18 and 10-3-9.

Case 10.4.4 Sit A is not confusing at all to me.

Fighting is a flagrant act. 4-18; 4-19-4.
Fighting can occur during a live or dead ball. 4-18
Flagrant fouls are personal or technical fouls. 4-19-4
If personal: contact ocurred during live ball. 4-19-1
If Technical: contact during dead ball 4-19-5c,
noncontact fouls 4-19-5b, 10-3, or
acts which causes a fight in retaliation 4-18-2

Punches during live ball are flagrant personal fouls and called a fight. Punches during a dead ball are flagrant technical fouls and called a fight. A finger poke (with or without contact) which causes another player to retaliate by throwing a punch (whther contact or not) is by definition a fight also and if you want I will go through each scenario possible. In every case I can come to the conclusion that contact during the live ball is never a technical foul.

Ronnie, if you wish to go through a bunch of scenarios either on this forum or through e-mails I am happy to do so.
Either way it is best discussed one at a time (so i don't have to write a book each time I post).

[Daryl H. Long]

Let me clarify one thing about the poke in the chest. If I see this in the game I am calling a technical foul on the offender with or without contact (10-3-7c). As 10-3-7 states, it is the unsporting ACTS or CONDUCT of the player that I am penalizing. It is not the actual touching of the finger to the chest that I am penalizing but the whole act with the underlying message meant to intimidate, disrespect, taunt, or bait the opponent.

[Daryl H. Long]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I read NFHS Casebook Play 4.18.2 as follows: A1's taunting foul causes the ball to become dead if Team A had managed to get the ball out-of-bounds for its throw-in or to remain dead if Team A had not. That means that B1's punch is a dead ball contact foul and therefore a technical foul.
[/B]

Naw, I think that you're reading it that way in order to try and support your personal opinion of this debate. The problems still remain that:
1) The case book play does not state that the whistle went before the retaliation.
2) When B1 retaliated, his punch may have missed. It doesn't matter because it's still a fight as per R4-18-1. There goes your dead ball contact foul theory.
3) The whole scenario in this case book play is considered one act. If you didn't consider it that way, then the book call for what you are proposing above isn't a fight but a false double foul. Iow, a technical foul during a live ball for taunting followed by a separate technical foul during the succeeding dead ball for fighting. That's not what the case play says happened. The case plays says that A1's T was for fighting, not taunting.
3) Change that case book play play to A1 taunting by finger-poking. It extrapolates the same way. Double technical foul and the initial T involved contact. If you call it any other way, you're back to a false double foul.
4) Rule 10-3-4 still says that fighting is a technical foul. It doesn't differentiate between fighting during a live ball or fighting during a dead ball. If it's fighting during a live ball, you could have contact fouls called Ts.


Those citations support some of Mulk's suppositions, and negate yours. Might be wise to slow down on the "leave Dodge" talk to Mulk. You might be on a stagecoach too.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Feb 27th, 2005 at 04:14 PM] [/B][/QUOTE]


JR:

I agree with you completely that the two CB Play's are confusing.

But in the Rule 4 CB Play, A1's taunting foul causes the ball to stay dead if it was dead when A1 taunted or to become dead if the ball was live at the time that A1 taunted B1. In either case, A1's foul is a technical foul and B1's foul is a dead ball contact foul and also a techncial foul.

And as I stated in my earlier post, the Rule 10 CB Play is just a run of the mill double personal foul between A1 and B1 with both players being disqualified if nothing else happens; bench personnel leaving the bench area to enter the court changes the double personal foul to flagrant technical fouls because A1 and B1's actions are now defined as a fighting.

I am not reading the CB Plays to support my opinion, I am reading them per the rules. I just think that the fighting definition could be better written and deleted all together. I think that the CB Plays handled the situations correctly by rule, but the fighting definition is confusing.

MTD, Sr. [/B][/QUOTE]

Mark,

Even I am confused at your interpretations of the above mentioned case plays. I may have said this before but:

Case 4.18.2 the ball became dead on the made basket (A1's dunk). No whistle necessary and the taunt and punch were during a dead ball.

Sase 10.4.4 sit A. Players punching each other during a live ball contitutes a fight (ie dbl flagrant person fouls)whether or not any substitutes enter the court. Besides that, it is the fight between A1 and B1 that each scenario ( a, b, and c) says that the substitutes either become/ did not become involved in.

[ronny mulkey]

Originally posted by Daryl H. Long
Let me clarify one thing about the poke in the chest. If I see this in the game I am calling a technical foul on the offender with or without contact (10-3-7c). As 10-3-7 states, it is the unsporting ACTS or CONDUCT of the player that I am penalizing. It is not the actual touching of the finger to the chest that I am penalizing but the whole act with the underlying message meant to intimidate, disrespect, taunt, or bait the opponent.

Preacher,

Amen brother. You apply this paragraph to an intimidating elbow scenario and "we got no" five page thread. But only if you want to because I wouldn't want you to stop officiating if you disagree with me.

Mulk

[Jurassic Referee]

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Hey, did you see the Oscar Awards last night? For all the pre-show hype I thought Chris Rock was kinda tame.

What do you think?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Dan_ref
[/B]

Hey, did you see the Oscar Awards last night? For all the pre-show hype I thought Chris Rock was kinda tame.

What do you think? [/B][/QUOTE]Watch the Oscar Awards? Would I miss the grandiose pageant that celebrates the brightest and greatest cinematic accomplishments of the previous year? Or, to maybe be a little more honest, would I miss seeing whose tits are closest to falling out of their dress this year? Hmmmm, maybe there should be an Oscar in that category.

Anyhoo, I digress......

I'm back. Gotta quit digressing. Gonna go blind one of these days.

When I got rid of my old coal-fired computer(EPA made me do it...sumthin' about air pollution), I got a brand new, nuclear-powered top-of-the-line A+++ 'puter that does everything. Everything, I tell ya. Even got CD and DVD makers on it to make my own CD's and movies. Well, I bribed the 8-year old kid from next door to show me how to use that sucker. Yup, he set it up to a p2p network and I now make my own CD's and DVD's. Well, I downloaded and burned a copy of Million Dollar Baby on a request from my wife. Well, not actually a request; more like her giving me a choice of doing it or speaking in a high, squeaky voice. She and a friend were watching it Saturday night....they asked me if I wanted to see it with them, but, unfortunately the Ecstasy Channel was screening that classic Debbie Does Houghton and you know I always hate to miss that one. Anyway, I was walking by, and my wife says "You gotta see this". I look---and Clint Eastwood is crying. Yup, Dirty Harry is just ablubbering his damn eyes out. Almost made me sick to watch it. John Wayne never cried. Nope, you never saw the Duke blubbering away like that. Lah me!

And then the damn picture wins an Oscar? You watch now, ol' Clint is jes' gonna be sobbing his eyes out in every new picture he's in. Lah me. There's sumthin' wrong with the world today.


What's a Chrisrock?

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Hey, did you see the Oscar Awards last night? For all the pre-show hype I thought Chris Rock was kinda tame.

What do you think? [/B]

Watch the Oscar Awards? Would I miss the grandiose pageant that celebrates the brightest and greatest cinematic accomplishments of the previous year? Or, to maybe be a little more honest, would I miss seeing whose tits are closest to falling out of their dress this year? Hmmmm, maybe there should be an Oscar in that category.

Anyhoo, I digress......

I'm back. Gotta quit digressing. Gonna go blind one of these days.

When I got rid of my old coal-fired computer(EPA made me do it...sumthin' about air pollution), I got a brand new, nuclear-powered top-of-the-line A+++ 'puter that does everything. Everything, I tell ya. Even got CD and DVD makers on it to make my own CD's and movies. Well, I bribed the 8-year old kid from next door to show me how to use that sucker. Yup, he set it up to a p2p network and I now make my own CD's and DVD's. Well, I downloaded and burned a copy of Million Dollar Baby on a request from my wife. Well, not actually a request; more like her giving me a choice of doing it or speaking in a high, squeaky voice. She and a friend were watching it Saturday night....they asked me if I wanted to see it with them, but, unfortunately the Ecstasy Channel was screening that classic Debbie Does Houghton and you know I always hate to miss that one. Anyway, I was walking by, and my wife says "You gotta see this". I look---and Clint Eastwood is crying. Yup, Dirty Harry is just ablubbering his damn eyes out. Almost made me sick to watch it. John Wayne never cried. Nope, you never saw the Duke blubbering away like that. Lah me!

And then the damn picture wins an Oscar? You watch now, ol' Clint is jes' gonna be sobbing his eyes out in every new picture he's in. Lah me. There's sumthin' wrong with the world today.


What's a Chrisrock? [/B][/QUOTE]

Can you say tits here? I hope we don't get fined by the FCC. And a Chris Rock is who you go to when you can't get Denzel Washington.

BTW...your 8 year old buddy didn't do you any favors.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/12...vs_bittorrent/
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,118628,00.asp
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,118485,00.asp
http://news.com.com/2100-1023-243432.html?legacy=cnet
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6504024/
http://www.mpaa.org/Press/RecTVComplaint.htm

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Dan_ref
[/B]

BTW...your 8 year old buddy didn't do you any favors.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/12...vs_bittorrent/
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,118628,00.asp
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,118485,00.asp
http://news.com.com/2100-1023-243432.html?legacy=cnet
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6504024/
http://www.mpaa.org/Press/RecTVComplaint.htm


[/B][/QUOTE]I knew all that. That's why I used Chuck's name and address when I joined.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

BTW...your 8 year old buddy didn't do you any favors.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/12...vs_bittorrent/
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,118628,00.asp
http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,118485,00.asp
http://news.com.com/2100-1023-243432.html?legacy=cnet
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6504024/
http://www.mpaa.org/Press/RecTVComplaint.htm


[/B]

I knew all that. That's why I used Chuck's name and address when I joined.

[/B][/QUOTE]

Hmmmm...that explains the "Someone has already chosen that ID" message when I tried..