flagrant player control?

[just another ref]

Anybody ever see or make the call flagrant player control?
Tonight late in a girls game blowout A1 just obviously deliberately ran over B1, who was backpeddling directly in front of her. I considered the call, and was uncertain if there is such a thing. I compromised by telling her coach that her player could have been kicked out for that foul.
She said nothing, but immediately removed the girl from the game. I see definitions here as contradictory, no free throws for player control, two free throws plus ball for flagrant, etc. So can a foul be both, or does one overrule the other?

[JRutledge]

I think that if you decide to call a flagrant foul, it does not matter whether the player has the ball or not. The same would be the case if you rule an intentional foul as well. You give two shots and the ball at the spot of the foul.

Peace

[tjones1]

Agreed. Ejection of A1, plus two free throws and ball at spot of foul.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by just another ref
Anybody ever see or make the call flagrant player control?

No such animal as a flagrant player control foul. A PC foul is a common foul, by definition. You can call an intentional or flagrant personal foul on the player with the ball though.

Yup, I've made the call a coupla times. The incidents always combined a player with the ball deliberately (imo) throwing an elbow into an opponent's face/head.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by just another ref
Anybody ever see or make the call flagrant player control?
Tonight late in a girls game blowout A1 just obviously deliberately ran over B1, who was backpeddling directly in front of her. I considered the call, and was uncertain if there is such a thing. I compromised by telling her coach that her player could have been kicked out for that foul.
She said nothing, but immediately removed the girl from the game. I see definitions here as contradictory, no free throws for player control, two free throws plus ball for flagrant, etc. So can a foul be both, or does one overrule the other?

I think a better compromise might have been to call it intentional. That way you get the message across, without having to deal with an ejection.

[TimTaylor]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
[/B]

No such animal as a flagrant player control foul. A PC foul is a common foul, by definition.
[/B][/QUOTE]

This is correct - applicable rules are 4.19.2 & 4.19.6

[tomegun]

Originally posted by rainmaker
I think a better compromise might have been to call it intentional. That way you get the message across, without having to deal with an ejection. [/B]

While I understand your thinking, this seems like a way to avoid getting "dirty." If the play warrants a flagrant foul, shouldn't the flagrant foul be called? One thing I can't understand is a need to get a message across. Can you explain that theory a little more?
If a player/coach/fan/observer knows the rules of a flagrant or intentional foul and the proper foul is avoided, this could open up a whole new can of worms. In the end, we could very easily understand and agree on this, but those two sentences alone caused a "huh."

[Massref3]

JR...If you determine that this is flagrant, don't hesitate to call it. Use common sense though and be sure that it warrants a flagrant foul. If in HS I would use discreation towards the end of the season because the conference can consider a flagrant foul a suspendable act. Again if in your determination if she commit a flagrant foul, even with the ball, call it. THere is no excuse or room for flagrant fouls in Basketball.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Massref3
JR...If you determine that this is flagrant, don't hesitate to call it. Use common sense though and be sure that it warrants a flagrant foul. If in HS I would use discreation towards the end of the season because the conference can consider a flagrant foul a suspendable act. Again if in your determination if she commit a flagrant foul, even with the ball, call it. THere is no excuse or room for flagrant fouls in Basketball.

Lemme make sure that I got this right now. If I see a flagrant foul, call it.

But don't call it if it's at the end of the season. Maybe.

Gee, I can't begin to tell you how much I appreciate your advice. I never would have come up with any of those conclusions all by myself.

I certainly never would have come up with the one about ignoring a flagrant foul at the end of a season because a player might be suspended.

Lah me....

[ChuckElias]

Come on, JR. Relax. . . breathe. Lemme stick up for my Boston compadre. All Massref is saying is what we tell each other in the last minute of every game. If we have a foul, let's make sure it really fits the game and the situation; b/c if we make a mistake, there's no room for the team to compensate later in the game. Massref is just applying it to the end of the season, rather than the end of the game. If we have a flagrant foul, by all means, let's call it; but let's make sure it really is flagrant, b/c if we make a mistake, there's no room for the team to compensate later in the season.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by ChuckElias
Come on, JR. Relax. . . breathe. Lemme stick up for my Boston compadre. All Massref is saying is what we tell each other in the last minute of every game. If we have a foul, let's make sure it really fits the game and the situation; b/c if we make a mistake, there's no room for the team to compensate later in the game. Massref is just applying it to the end of the season, rather than the end of the game. If we have a flagrant foul, by all means, let's call it; but let's make sure it really is flagrant, b/c if we make a mistake, there's no room for the team to compensate later in the season.

Chuck, I really don't need somebody coming in here to tell me to use "common sense" or to lecture me on how I should use "discretion". Believe it or not, I didn't fall off of a turnip truck yesterday, wander into a gym, and say "Hey, I wanna be one of them there referee guys".

Telling anybody to use discretion when calling a flagrant foul just because a player might end up suspended just completely rubs me the wrong way too. To be quite honest, all that shows me is an official who is a little short in the sack department. A flagrant foul is a flagrant foul.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by ChuckElias
Come on, JR. Relax. . . breathe. Lemme stick up for my Boston compadre. All Massref is saying is what we tell each other in the last minute of every game. If we have a foul, let's make sure it really fits the game and the situation; b/c if we make a mistake, there's no room for the team to compensate later in the game. Massref is just applying it to the end of the season, rather than the end of the game. If we have a flagrant foul, by all means, let's call it; but let's make sure it really is flagrant, b/c if we make a mistake, there's no room for the team to compensate later in the season.

Puh-leeze.

The last thing I'm concerning myself with is how will coach A recover if I issue a flagrant to A1 near the end of the season. It's coach A's problem, maybe he should have coached his team to not engage in flagrant or near flagrant acts. I mean, he did have all season to get THAT message across, didn't he?

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by tomegun

While I understand your thinking, this seems like a way to avoid getting "dirty." If the play warrants a flagrant foul, shouldn't the flagrant foul be called? One thing I can't understand is a need to get a message across. Can you explain that theory a little more?
If a player/coach/fan/observer knows the rules of a flagrant or intentional foul and the proper foul is avoided, this could open up a whole new can of worms. In the end, we could very easily understand and agree on this, but those two sentences alone caused a "huh." [/B]

Tom -- The original post implied that the foul was too rough for an ordinary PC, but maybe not quite flagrant. The description sounded to me like it might not really be flagrant. When a foul is flagrant, call it flagrant!! I'm not saying we should avoid the proper call. But it sounded from the post as though the ref hesitated to call it flagrant because it really wasn't but he wanted something a little more punitive than an ordinary PC. I'm saying that the "in-between" fouls have an "inbetween" penalty -- the intentional.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by TimTaylor
This is correct - applicable rules are 4.19.2 & 4.19.6

There are no such rules.

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Telling anybody to use discretion when calling a flagrant foul just because a player might end up suspended just completely rubs me the wrong way too.

Yep, me too. I would have posted the same thing but JR beat me to it. If it's flagrant, it's flagrant. I'm unconcerned with the consequences the player will suffer with the state association. It should be given no more consideration at the end of the season that it would at any other time.

BTW, welcome Massref. Don't let us scare you off. We bark but we don't bite. Well, not very often.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by BktBallRef
We bark but we don't bite. Well, not very often.

We don't bite first.