Intentional Technical Foul

[slow whistle]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Wrong.

IF the push while the ball is live rises only to the level of a common foul, then the same push while the ball is dead would be ignored (that is, no penalty -- I'm sure the official would address the situation).

If the push while the ball is live rises to the leve of an intentional foul (and Intentional Personal foul), the the same push while the ball is dead would be an Intentional Technical foul.

Same as the above paragraph for Flagrant fouls.

Agree with you Bob, I was not trying to address the nature of the fouls, only the structure of the definitions (ie a foul is primarily personal, secondarily a push) If we are to say that a foul is primarily intentional and secondarily technical then why don't we signal the primary part of it?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by slow whistle

Agree with you Bob, I was not trying to address the nature of the fouls, only the structure of the definitions (ie a foul is primarily personal, secondarily a push) If we are to say that a foul is primarily intentional and secondarily technical then why don't we signal the primary part of it?

Because it's not "primarily personal, secondarily a push". It's primarily personal, secondarily common.