What do you have?

[OHBBREF]

Well first if the Ref gets the violation on the shooter we probably do not see this play evolve the way it does on film.

I do not see that you can get a fight out of this, since there is no retaliation and while it is a train wreck the contact is not that severe - however I think you could get an intentional out of it, it is a non basketball play that results in a dangerous situation. and as soon as that kid stood up and smirked you could whack him if you chose and eject him.
At the least at the end of this sequence I'm talking to his coach to get him out of the game for his own good.

This is one of those situations where if you deal with the initial issue you do not most likely have the second issue.

[eyezen]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Lah Me: I just realized that your a newbie.

You didn't really believe what you just typed there did you?

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by eyezen

You didn't really believe what you just typed there did you?

On the right hand side, it says that he joined Nov 2008. Newbie could mean that his registration date is very recent.

Most newbies ask for the Fed test. I wonder if this guy will ask.

[wrincker]

Unsporting Technical/Ejection for the thug!

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Lah Me

CASE BOOK PLAY 10.4.5 SITUATION A!!!

10.4.5 SITUATION A: Post players A1 and B1 begin punching each other and play is stopped.....
RULING: A1 and B1 are charged with flagrant fouls and are disqualified, but no free throws result from the double PERSONAL flagrant fouls.

NFHS rule 4-19-4 says "A flagrant foul may be a personal or technical foul of a violent or savage nature, or a technical non-contact foul which displays unacceptable conduct. If personal, it involves, but is not limited to violent contact such as: striking, kicking and kneeing."

NFHS rule 4-18-1 FIGHTING says "Fighting is a flagrant act and can occur while the ball is dead or LIVE. Fighting includes but is not limited to combative acts such as an attempt to STRIKE, punch or kick an opponent with a fist, hands, arms, legs or feet regardless of whether contact is made."

Flagrant contact while the ball is live = a flagrant personal foul. That includes striking an opponent, which by definition is fighting.

How much more definitive do you want the FED to be? And how much more ridiculous can it be for people to claim that TWO case plays are wrong and their own personal vision of the way things ought to be is correct?

Silly monkies!

Lah me.....

I like this guy's style!

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I like this guy's style!

I have no problem with his style, but his interpretation is severely flawed. For some reason I have a feeling he won't be changing his mind.