Technical foul

Jurassic Referee · #9 (**permalink**) Tue Feb 21, 2006, 09:45am

Quote:

Originally posted by ronny mulkey

Quote:

Originally posted by dprice
What is the proper technical foul to administer in this situation.

Team A player who has inside position on FT lane and Team B player who has next lane position are jawing at one another in a manner that cannot be heard out loud. On shot and block out attempt Team A player (inside) winds up and drills Team B with an elbow to the ribs.

I give a personal T, two shots and ball out of bounds. Should this be a flagrant T though?

Hardly ever disagree with JR, but I think that you saw an intimidating act and you assessed a technical for it. Good call. Doesn't make sense to let a player "wind up and drill" and just call a common or intentional foul just because contact occurred at the end of the intimidating act. I don't think that it is the spirit and intent of the that rule (which says that you can't have a technical foul if contact occurs during a live ball) to prevent the official from taking care of business when he sees an act meant to intimidate verses an act meant to injure (which is your flagrant). In your situation, ignore the contact and penalize the intimidating act.

Ron, language right outa the rule book definitions in R4-19:

-ART. 1 A personal foul is a player foul which involves illegal contact with an opponent while the ball is live.
- ART. 5 A technical foul is:
(b) a noncontact foul by a player.
(c) an intentional or flagrant contact foul while the ball is dead, except a foul by an airborne player.
-ART. 3: A foul shall also be ruled intentional if while playing the ball a player causes excessive contact with an opponent.
-ART. 4 A flagrant foul may be a personal or technical foul of a violent or savage nature. If personal, it involves, but is not limited to violent contact such as striking, kicking or kneeing. If technical, it involves dead-ball contact...

It doesn't matter what either of us thinks the purpose and intent of the rules should be either. The FED couldn't have written these particular definitions any clearer. You cannot, by rule, call a technical foul of any kind for live-ball illegal contact. Depending on how bad you judge the elbow to be, the only choices you have are a personal foul, an intentional personal foul or a flagrant personal foul. An intentional personal foul sends the same message as a "T" imo. And if you judged it as being a flagrant act, there's really no difference in the outcome between calling a flagrant personal foul or a flagrant technical foul- except for where the throw-in would be.