By definition in the federation rule book no contact technical can occur during a LIVE ball...But...can a contact situation be considered unsporting and be assessed a T during a live ball? Here's the sitch;

A1 rebounds missed shot by team B. While in the backcourt, B1 is "smothering" (no contact) A1. A1 "chins" the ball and in frustration intentionally elbows B1. The action was not considered flagrant, but the calling official issued a Technical Foul for unsporting conduct, even though this was a CONTACT foul.

Our crew met following the play and I expressed my interpretation that the foul should either be

1)player control-if not intentional,
2)intentional personal foul - if intentional,
or 3)flagrant personal if deemed flagrant by the officials.

The crew stayed with the unsporting T.

Our entire crew is trying to bring clarification to this matter to either justify the final decision or to avoid making this same mistake again.

Please confirm the correct interp.....or let us know if there is an instance where this CAN be administered as an unsporting Technical foul.

Thanks in advance for your response(s)

imo, if the elbow is intentional, that is how it should be called, intentional foul, other team gets two shots and the ball(nfhs)!!! Probably border line, flagrant, you really have to see it to call it appropriately i think!!!

now if he/she is just pivoting and you deem it as not intentional, the offensive foul probably may be the call, again you just have to see it!

I believe the confusion is because excessively swinging the arms/elbows used to be a T. When it was changed to a violation, the definitions of rule 4-19 now came into play.

If ball is live, I'd go with the PC/Intentional/Flagrant option - if ball is dead, it's either Intentional or Technical (and possibly flagrant technical) by definition.

Tim:

Go to the head of the class for knowing your definitions, and the rest of your officiating crew goes to the corner with dunce caps on their heads. You were correct in assessment of the situation. A live ball contact foul is always a personal foul.

MTD, Sr.

MTD, what about NF 10-3-9? Player technical.....A player shall not.....be charged with fighting.

Any time elbows are swung and contact is made it is a T foul! If flugreunt then player is ejected as well...

Not true.

Somebody quote us the rule...

I don't have my new books with me but it used to be under 10-3-8g as a T without contact (2001-02).

Now without contact it is a violation... what rule?
Now with contact it is ??? ... what rule?

Hows about 9.13.3 as below
 

9.13 ART. 3 . . . Action of arm(s) and elbow(s) resulting from total body movements as in pivoting or movement of the ball incidental to feinting with it, releasing it, or moving it to prevent a held ball or loss of control shall not be considered excessive

I have used this as a rule cite when officials want to call something crazy. I can accept a PC call on occasion but in most cases a properly schooled player who is pivotting with full body movement engenders nothing more than incidental contact against a swarming defender. There must be a reason this action is specifically condoned...

Whaddyall think???

[Edited by justacoach on Feb 24th, 2005 at 05:58 PM]

Totally and completely wrong.

Buckley, by rule, it can't be a T. Call it an intentional foul. The pnealty is the same and you're within the rules.

Why is the crew so adamant that it be a T?

I've called it (violation) once this year. A1 dribbled across half court into a trap and picked up his dribble. B1 and B2 right up on him, but legal. He gets frustrated and starts swinging, and I call the violation.
His coach can't believe it and asks me how he's supposed to protect the ball.
what I wanted to say was, "by not dribbling into a trap." What I said was, "Not by swinging his elbows."

We are not talking about fighting in this play. Plus the fighting definition just causes more problems.

MTD, Sr.

I had a similar play in a college game a couple of weeks ago. Defense grabbed a rebound and felt the offensive player trying to go for the ball. Player turned head slightly and measured the location of the pressure. Player brought ball under chin and swung elbows to hit player in the throat who goes down in a heap. I called an intentional foul. Player wanted to know why it was intentional, and I replied that the only reason you are still in the game is because it was called intentional.

Thanks to all replies. The discussions confirm that I was right in my interpretation. The crew was not adamant about assessing a T, but because of some slight disagreement, we did not want to have lengthy debate at mid court and we went with the T... and left the calling official to explain. We talked as a crew again last night, and that official feels he, and we, were wrong in our application of the rules.

Live ball contact should be a personal foul...player control, intentional, or flagrant.

Thanks again.......on to new subjects.

With all due respect to TH and MTD, I think that an unsporting T CAN be called if you are penalizing the "unfair, unethical or dishonorable conduct" that precedes the contact. This has nothing to do with contact (even if it occurs because of this act)or excessive elbows. For example, if a player intentionally planted an elbow against someone's face, you would probably eject? What if this same action had missed? Ejection? Violation? You know the play where the player swings his elbow around in the air in an intimidating manner? Violation only?

Consider an off ball situation where opponents are in a joust, and one of them ends it by just shoving the other player off. That's a T and it not because of the contact but because of the act itself. One player pokes another in the chest with his finger in a menancing manner. Forget the contact and penalize the dishonorable conduct. Just because an act involves an elbow, I am not limiting myself only to an excessive elbow call and the resulting penalties.

Before you jump all over me for my opinion and ask for Rules support, please see 4-19-13.

IMHO

Mulk