Flagrant Foul ruling

[mick]

Originally posted by coachk
Mick-
My player was simply trying to prevent the other player from shooting an uncontested layup. Most of the fans (for both teams) thought it should have been ruled an intentional foul rather than flagrant. There was certainly no intent by my player to harm the other.

As I understand the rule, the only difference in the way intentional and flagrant fouls are treated is that for a flagrant foul the player is ejected. That is, the handling of the free throws and the awarding of the ball is handled exactly the same. By the way, even though it was ruled a flagrant foul, my player was NOT ejected.

K-

Thanks coachk,
So, it was treated (though incorrectly) as an intentional, though called a flagrant.
Heck, if that was 16 years ago I coulda been your official for the day.
mick