Intentional Technical Foul

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by slow whistle

I understand what you are saying (and I think I am splitting hairs) - wouldn't it be a true statement though to say that you can equate an "intentional" technical to a "pushing" foul..describes the nature of the foul, but really what you have with a "pushing" foul is a personal foul by definition (for instance). In NCAA it is an important distinction, where "intentional" signifies not only the nature of the foul, but also how you administer...in Fed all I have ever heard or used is Administrative, Player, etc...

What are you asking? This paragraph is a bit jumbled.

[slow whistle]

Originally Posted by zm1283

What are you asking? This paragraph is a bit jumbled.

Basically saying that "intentional technical" is semantics and is irrelevant the same way it is irrelevant whether you signal a "push" or a "block"...anybody ever signaled a "block" at the table when what really happened was a "push"? Did it make a bit of difference?

Originally Posted by slow whistle

anybody ever signaled a "block" at the table when what really happened was a "push"? Did it make a bit of difference?

Yes & he!! yes (if the coach knows his stuff).

[slow whistle]

Originally Posted by Ch1town

Yes & he!! yes (if the coach knows his stuff).

So the coach was ok with the foul, but did not like the secondary signal so he/she jumped all over you? Guessing he/she didn't like the foul call so was going to jump you regardless of your secondary signal...point being the secondary signal is useful to indicate the nature of the foul, but it really doesn't mean anything in the scheme of things (administration, etc)...how many times have you given the incorrect one and just moved on?

Originally Posted by slow whistle

So the coach was ok with the foul, but did not like the secondary signal so he/she jumped all over you? Guessing he/she didn't like the foul call so was going to jump you regardless of your secondary signal...point being the secondary signal is useful to indicate the nature of the foul, but it really doesn't mean anything in the scheme of things (administration, etc)...how many times have you given the incorrect one and just moved on?

First of all coaches don't "jump all over me" either we show a mutual respect & talk like men or they get put in check... plain & simple.

To answer your question, I had a coach say "how could that be push when he clearly blocked him?"

I've learned to give the correct signal for what actually happened since then.

[slow whistle]

Originally Posted by Ch1town

First of coaches don't "jump all over me" either we show a mutual respect & talk like men or they get put in check... plain & simple.

To answer your question, I had a coach say "how could that be push when he clearly blocked him?"

I've learned to give the correct signal for what actually happened since then.

Good grief, sorry if I offended your sensibilities by saying "jump all over me", it is a figure of speech. I'm not trying to argue with you all I am saying is that whether you give the correct secondary or not is irrelevant. Should you try to give the right one every time, of course good for you if you do it right every time, you shold strive to do so! If you give the "wrong" secondary from time to time does it matter? No! A) Many times no one can know which part of the contact you are signaling the foul for anyways (was it the hold or the push that happened afterwards? what if the hold and the push are simultaneous?) and B) The administration is identical

[Adam]

Originally Posted by slow whistle

Basically saying that "intentional technical" is semantics and is irrelevant the same way it is irrelevant whether you signal a "push" or a "block"...anybody ever signaled a "block" at the table when what really happened was a "push"? Did it make a bit of difference?

Fair enough, but you asked if it was actually a defined term. It is, but I would never signal the intentional part during a game.

[slow whistle]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Fair enough, but you asked if it was actually a defined term. It is, but I would never signal the intentional part during a game.

Agreed after looking it up, just have never heard it used in that way...and my primary point was that you would never signal it which we agree on..