Intentional or Technical

[klancie]

I discussed this with the officials after the game. In their opinion, it was definitely not a normal PC foul, as A1 took her right hand off the ball to throw the elbow, and then made flagrant contact with B1.

They reasoned that since the foul was flagrant, it should have been technical.

I reasoned that since the ball was live, it should not have been a technical foul.

[derwil]

No Technical, "just" a flagrant. Toss the player (10-6 under penalties), two shots with the ball inbounded at spot nearest the foul. Foul counts towards the bonus.

Nothing in the mechanics book for flagrant. Do you just signal as a normal foul and tell the scorer that it's flagrent?

[refnrev]

I assume that since it was flagrant they tossed the girl. If not, they blew this play in every sense. Just out of curiosity, what level was this game?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by klancie

I discussed this with the officials after the game. In their opinion, it was definitely not a normal PC foul, as A1 took her right hand off the ball to throw the elbow, and then made flagrant contact with B1.

They reasoned that since the foul was flagrant, it should have been technical.

I reasoned that since the ball was live, it should not have been a technical foul.

That brings a little more light to the situation because you actually talked to the officials and did not just observe something from the peanut gallery.

And no, flagrant fouls and technical fouls are not one in the same. You could have a technical foul during a live ball, but that would be for conduct of the participants, not a foul because of contact. That is a common mistake officials make in this part of the rule. Flagrant Fouls are not common so people think an ejection always involves a Technical Foul.

Peace