I don't talk to fans after games, most fans ARE NOT jerks, when I'm in the stands I never comment to a fan about a call on the court unless it's in the course of telling the fan to STFU :D , Dan needs to take a Midol.

Saw this last week
 

Before I tell my little story I want to make sure I have this right.

Player A throws elbow to face of Player B. I tweet . I have an intentional foul that I deem flagrant. Junior is then DQ. I know there are other options but I want to make sure this option could be a correct option ....

I saw this happen. Boys Jv tourney .Two rivals from pretty decent programs. So for JV teams they have it going on. player A ,during a live ball, throws elbow into face of player B. Nice solid contact. Refs call a personal foul-ball on the sideline. About 2 minutes later Player A throws another elbow and makes contact again. They tweet and give a technical. And then Player A goes on to be a major problem child the rest of the game.....

IMO the first elbow thrown and subsequent contact was so far beyond the line that the kid needed to be sitting down for the rest of the night.

Are this many officials really calling technical fouls for contact during live ball?

Believe It or not
 

I gave this sitch to one of our higher ups and he told me you can call a technical foul on anyone at anytime. I filed this in my "I don't think so file ".

Yes, Dan should check out the great taste of decaf. Yes, Dan needs a Midol. While I agree that officials -- and probably ex-officials -- should not berate other officials on the floor, if somebody asks you "is that the rule?", your options are limited. Lie, answer the question honestly and diplomatically, or feign death until the other person leaves. I respectfully opt for the honest and diplomatic approach.

Having said that, in answer to the original question of whether an elbow to the head is an automatic ejection, I believe that the NBA has a rule that is close to that. Maybe the official works some pro-am ball and got confused.

Sure, if you call it unsportsmanlike.

1) Wrong concept. You can have an intentional foul that is either personal or technical in nature. Rule 4-19-3. You can have a flagrant foul that is either personal or technical in nature. Rule 4-19-4. There is <b>no</b> such beast as an intentional flagrant foul, either personal or technical. It's true, it's true....

2) If the contact occurred during a live ball, it can <b>never</b> be called a technical foul. The 4 options on the elbow call are a player or team control foul(dependant on whether the elbower was holding or dribbling the ball at the time of the elbow), an intentional personal foul or a flagrant personal foul.

WTF?

From my understanding, here is the order of events.

a.) Foul and ejection are called- no bad mouthing of official.

b.) Game ends. A good amount of time after the game is over, parent of ejected player (who may not have even seen the play), politely asks official for an explanation of what happened.

c.) The official, good guy that he is, gives his interpretation to the parent. (Which he is under NO obligation to do.) Part of his explanation is the foul was not flagrant, but an elbow to the face is an automatic ejection.

d.) The parent, having a friend who he knows has officiating experience, asks if that is a correct interpretation of the rule. (Which it is NOT- there is certainly a ton of reasoning to call this a flagrant foul, but if the official did not believe it was a flagrant act -which is what he said- he should not have ejected the player.)

e.) Shave-tail says he does not believe the interpretation is correct, but he is not 100% sure, so he will get on the internets, where you can find the answer to anything, because there is a message board with officials opinions that he respects.

f.) Said officials flame him for three pages for being critical of the official.

Nice.

Say what? You can call a technical foul for unsportsmanlike <b>CONTACT</b> during a live ball? You know better than that, Scrappy.

I didn't say that. But an unsportsmanlike foul is always technical, regardless of when it occurs, live ball or dead. So the mentor was right. A technical foul can be on anyone at any time. That was my only point.

During a live ball, what contact is there that you would cal a T for?

Go back and read the first post again. And try comprehending it this time. Shave-tail told the father <b>during</b> the game that you could only toss somebody if a punch was thrown. At that time, shave-tail didn't have a clue what the actual call was; he was just, plain and simple, second-guessing the official with no actual knowledge of what the call was. Shave-tails statement to the father <b>during</b> the game was also completely wrong, by rule also.

That's why shave-tail got flamed. That's why if shave-tail was an official, shave-tail woulda been in deep doo-doo if he had been caught doing that.

Most officials are aware of that.

None. You're missing my point. Somebody said that he'd been told that you can call a T on anyone at any time. He filed that in the "yeah, right" file. My only point is that you CAN call a T on anybody at any time. Even during a live ball if the foul is unsportsmanlike in nature.

Sorry for confusing everyone by stating the obvious! :)

Scrappy, go back and read Chess Ref's post at 9:27am. He was responding to Tomegun's specific inquiry asking if a technical foul could be called for <b>live ball contact</b>. Chess Ref's answer was that his "higher-up" said that you can call a technical foul on anyone at any time. That statement is wrong. You can't call a technical foul for live-ball contact. Sez so right in the rules.

If you don't believe me, find an IAABO interpreter and ask him.

I understand I just wanted to make the point that any contact that is made during a live ball is not classified under the T foul provision, no matter how severe or if you feel it is unsporting. Even fighting is classified as flagrant fouls which carry DQ but is not a T.