Question...

[Scrapper1]

That's TWICE in one thread that I've been too slow by just a couple minutes!

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

Hrm...I'm obviously having a tough day. That said, I just went to get my rulebook. Here's what I read in 4-19-4:

A flagrant foul may be a personal or technical foul of a violent or savage nature...It may or may not be intentional.

So, why can't I have a flagrant intentional foul? Or is it simply saying that the act itself may or may not be intentional, but that doesn't change the type of foul?

Sorry for the confusion this morning. Ugh.

The NFHS needs to change that wording to "It may or may not be deliberate." That is what they mean. They aren't talking about the category of foul there. The are using the word in its common English language meaning, not as basketball jargon.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

That's TWICE in one thread that I've been too slow by just a couple minutes!

Well you beat me by one minute and bob got me by two.

[jdw3018]

Thanks all...glad I got that cleared up in my cluttered head.

Now, hopefully I don't have a flagrant intentional technical violent and unsporting foul call tonight.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

That's TWICE in one thread that I've been too slow by just a couple minutes!

But you beat Nevada!

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

But you beat Nevada!

Shut up!

Plus I beat you with my response by less than a minute.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

Thanks all...glad I got that cleared up in my cluttered head.

Now, hopefully I don't have a flagrant intentional technical violent and unsporting foul call tonight.

...in a false double multiple situation.

PS: Many officials struggled with fouls' definitions.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

PS: Many officials struggled with fouls' definitions.

True - but I normally don't. Not sure what was happening this morning. Obviously it's what I get for taking a few years off before coming back last year...

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

True - but I normally don't. Not sure what was happening this morning. Obviously it's what I get for taking a few years off before coming back last year...

Coming back to mornings? Did you work nights for a few years?

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Coming back to mornings? Did you work nights for a few years?

*Groan*

I'm definitely not, nor have I ever been, a morning person!

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Sure there is. From the definition of an intentional foul, it's contact when not making a legitimate attempt to play the ball or player. Whointhehell would ever make a legitimate attempt to play the FT shooter? You can make a case for forfeiture also, language-wise, by using rule 5-4-1 if a team decided that it would be fun and giggles to pull this crap more than once. Just call it a travesty of the game.

The idea imo is to nail 'em with the most severe penalty that you can think of, so that they will have to think about it before pulling crap like that again.

Of course, being a law'n'order kinda guy, I have to admit that I also think that flogging should be part of the technical foul penalty too.

Fair enough. And I agree about the flogging, especially for coaches

[Indianaref]

I remember when Clark Kellogg was at OSU, his pre-shot routine for a free throws was to toss the ball in the air (similar to an official tossing a jump ball at the start of a game), catch the ball, then shoot his free throw. There never was a problem until one game when the defensive player nearest Clark (probably a Michigan player) decided to jump in and intercept his pre-shot toss. Hopefully I described it well enough so it can be discussed. I believe the annoucers for the game said that the defensive player and his coach were arguing that was Clark's shot, which it clearly wasn't. Unsporting tech?

[CoachP]

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Indianaref

I remember when Clark Kellogg was at OSU, his pre-shot routine for a free throws was to toss the ball in the air (similar to an official tossing a jump ball at the start of a game), catch the ball, then shoot his free throw. There never was a problem until one game when the defensive player nearest Clark (probably a Michigan player) decided to jump in and intercept his pre-shot toss. Hopefully I described it well enough so it can be discussed. I believe the annoucers for the game said that the defensive player and his coach were arguing that was Clark's shot, which it clearly wasn't. Unsporting tech?

Naw, that one's easy. Just agree with the coach and his defensive player that it was a free throw. Then call goaltending during a FT, count the point and then give 'em the appropriate "T" too.

Same rule in both NFHS and NCAA.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Naw, that one's easy. Just agree with the coach and his defensive player that it was a free throw. Then call goaltending during a FT, count the point and then give 'em the appropriate "T" too.

Assuming it was still on the way up when the defense touched it.