FASTBALL Right In The . . .

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Freddy

I've only seen Situation #2 (below) two times in 3-1/2 decades. But each time it occurred, I'm not sure the proper call was made in reaction to the situation.

Now, Situation #2) Same scenerio, but this time A1 FIRES A FASTBALL RIGHT INTO THE CROTCH of B1, who is closely but legally defending against the throw in.
Comment: Seems to me there was obvious intended injury here. Would a proper penalty be:
A) an intentional personal foul, since (4-19-3) A1 undertakes something "which neutralizes an opponent's obvious advantageous position", e.g., the ability to play without pain?
B) a technical foul, according to 4-19-5, "An intentional . . . contact foul while the ball is dead...", though said contact is delivered by means of the ball, which doesn't seem quite right.
C) a technical foul for unsporting conduct (4-19-14) for "a non-contact technical foul which consists of unfair, unethical, dishonorable conduct or any behavior not in accordance with the spirit of fair play"?
D) since injury seemed clearly to be the intent, due to the "fastball" nature of the act, might it be so serious so as to be considered a flagrant foul and subsequent disqualification?

Your response is invited.

Use NFHS case book play 10.3.7 for guidance. That one refers to a thrower hitting a defender in the face with the throw-in. Jmo, but hitting him in the nuts should be considered the same(or worse ).

The case play says that the administering official will have to determine their call based on:
1) Was the throw-in to B1's face accidental or a voluntary, planned act?
2) Was the ball contact caused by the movement of the defender?
3) Was the act of an unsporting nature?

If you feel that it was accidental or that the defender moved into the path of throw-in, the only call would be to repeat the throw-in if it went out of bounds.

If you felt that the the act was deliberate and malicious, you can call either a technical foul on the thrower(using 4-19-5(b)-->a non-contact foul by a player....or 4-19-14), or if you felt that the act was an attempt to injure--> a flagrant technical foul(using 4-19-4--> non-contact which is extreme).

It has to be be a technical foul because there was no physical contact between the two players. All personal fouls involve contact.

Personally, if I felt that the thrower deliberately hit a defender in the face or balls with a throw-in, I'm calling a flagrant "T".

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Use NFHS case book play 10.3.7 for guidance. That one refers to a thrower hitting a defender in the face with the throw-in. Jmo, but hitting him in the nuts should be considered the same(or worse ).

The case play says that the administering official will have to determine their call based on:
1) Was the throw-in to B1's face accidental or a voluntary, planned act?
2) Was the ball contact caused by the movement of the defender?
3) Was the act of an unsporting nature?

If you feel that it was accidental or that the defender moved into the path of throw-in, the only call would be to repeat the throw-in if it went out of bounds.

If you felt that the the act was deliberate and malicious, you can call either a technical foul on the thrower(using 4-19-5(b)-->a non-contact foul by a player....or 4-19-14), or if you felt that the act was an attempt to injure--> a flagrant technical foul(using 4-19-4--> non-contact which is extreme).

It has to be be a technical foul because there was no physical contact between the two players. All personal fouls involve contact.

Personally, if I felt that the thrower deliberately hit a defender in the face or balls with a throw-in, I'm calling a flagrant "T".

Beat ya!