Can't make this stuff up. Tech foul

[phansen]

A1 is on a break away lay up. B1 is chasing from behind. As A1 goes up for the layup, B1 reaches down with both hands to A1's shorts and attempts to pull them down. B1 doesn't get a good enough tug and A1 scores the basket.
I counted the basket and gave B1 a technical foul. Opposing coach wanted an intentional foul which I don't think is right. I told B1 he was making a travesty of the game and that was what the foul was for. He didn't argue but looking in the rule book I would have probably went with 10-3-6 and just say it was an unsporting foul.

[mbyron]

Right, unsporting T is the way to go here. Coach wanted an intentional so that he'd get the ball under the basket. Ignore him.

[ma_ref]

That's very interesting...and certainly a first that I've heard. I've heard of "pantsing" your friends in the interest of good-natured-humor, but never an opponent.

Hypothetically speaking, if B1 was successful, and let's take it a step further, and say B1 got the undergarments of A1 as well, exposing him for all the gym to see, I wonder if there couldn't be some kind of assault charges filed against B1? Again, assuming the act was intentional as seems to be the case from the OP...

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by ma_ref

That's very interesting...and certainly a first that I've heard. I've heard of "pantsing" your friends in the interest of good-natured-humor, but never an opponent.

Hypothetically speaking, if B1 was successful, and let's take it a step further, and say B1 got the undergarments of A1 as well, exposing him for all the gym to see, I wonder if there couldn't be some kind of assault charges filed against B1? Again, assuming the act was intentional as seems to be the case from the OP...

In your situation a flagrant foul would be in order.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

In your situation a flagrant foul would be in order.

Ditto.

[ma_ref]

I'm certainly not objecting to upgrading the foul to flagrant and ejecting the player (I'm sure that could easily be justified as taunting), but I'm wondering if the my hypothetical situation could have ramifications beyond the game itself and carry over into the real world...

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by ma_ref

I'm certainly not objecting to upgrading the foul to flagrant and ejecting the player (I'm sure that could easily be justified as taunting), but I'm wondering if the my hypothetical situation could have ramifications beyond the game itself and carry over into the real world...

I would think it certainly could.

Lesson to all officials - don't de-pants players.

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by phansen

A1 is on a break away lay up. B1 is chasing from behind. As A1 goes up for the layup, B1 reaches down with both hands to A1's shorts and attempts to pull them down. B1 doesn't get a good enough tug and A1 scores the basket.
I counted the basket and gave B1 a technical foul. Opposing coach wanted an intentional foul which I don't think is right. I told B1 he was making a travesty of the game and that was what the foul was for. He didn't argue but looking in the rule book I would have probably went with 10-3-6 and just say it was an unsporting foul.

While I was not there, based on the description I am still not sure that this foul was anything more than an intentional foul of grabbing an opponent's uniform. phansen is the only one that can answer as to whether it was clear that B1's objective was not just to foul A1, but rather to pull the shorts down for the purpose of embarassing A1 (or some other malicious intent).

My initial thought was a simple intentional foul. MByron, you MIGHT be right that the Coach B wanted intentional because of ball location, but I think his primary concern was to get more than a basket single FT out of the play. My guess is that the coach was fine with a basket, two FTs and the ball at the division line.

Something prior to this situation would have had to have tipped me off that something was in-the-brewing for me to even think flagrant foul or technical foul in this case. But, as I have stated, phansen is the only one of us who could determine intent in this situation.

[Adam]

I think the perpetrator's coach is the one who wanted the intentional, not the shooter's. If not, I think CMHCoach is right about the coach's intent.

This is intentional all the way, and if it led to retaliation from A1, I'd consider it flagrant.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by ma_ref

I'm certainly not objecting to upgrading the foul to flagrant and ejecting the player (I'm sure that could easily be justified as taunting), but I'm wondering if the my hypothetical situation could have ramifications beyond the game itself and carry over into the real world...

Maybe, but that's not our department. I certainly would not discuss the matter with anyone (other than the police, if they requested an interview).

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by phansen

A1 is on a break away lay up. B1 is chasing from behind. As A1 goes up for the layup, B1 reaches down with both hands to A1's shorts and attempts to pull them down. B1 doesn't get a good enough tug and A1 scores the basket.
I counted the basket and gave B1 a technical foul. Opposing coach wanted an intentional foul which I don't think is right.

Coach was right; you were wrong.

A live-ball contact foul has to be a personal foul of some kind by definition. See Rule 4-19-1. You have your choice of a common, shooting, intentional or flagrant personal foul. An intentional personal foul seems like the best option to me as the player wasn't making a legitimate attempt to play the ball(Rule 4-19-3).

Technical fouls are defined under rule 4-19-5. Note that live-ball technical fouls are by definition a non-contact foul by a player(R4-19-5).

Shoot 2 FT's with no one lined up and team A then gets a throw-in at the closest spot to B1's foul.

Rules rulz!

[IREFU2]

I concur

[bradfordwilkins]

So jumping off this thread -- what if A1 pulls down the pants (not the undergarments) of A2 (his/her teammate). Both are active in the game... I mean a warning for an untucked shirt maybe? lol But anything?

A step further, lets say the undergarments go down... indecent exposure... you got anything? I would think something but wouldn't even know where to begin! haha

[Mark Padgett]

I don't think it's that big of a deal for a player to pull off the pants of another player, as long as it's not followed by "illegal use of hands".

[AKOFL]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

I don't think it's that big of a deal for a player to pull off the pants of another player, as long as it's not followed by "illegal use of hands".

You reffs are always ruining all the fun