Elbowing

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

The difference is that you can't call a non-intentional, non-flagrant technical foul for contact after the ball has become dead, or for non-intentional, non-flagrant contact committed by or on an airborne shooter after the ball is dead either. Iow, you couldn't apply NFHS rules 4-19-1NOTE or 4-19-5(c). You can call an intententional or flagrant technical foul under those circumstances though.

Are you proposing that we just ignore those rules completely, as if they didn't exist?

Silly monkey!

JR:

Speaking per NFHS Rules only (because where play is continued after an intentional, non-flagrant foul in NCAA Rules makes it necessary for there to be a definition of an intentional TF) the point I am trying to make is, that penalty wise, under NFHS Rules, there is no difference between a non-intentional, non-flagrant TF and an intentional, non-flagrant TF: Two free throws and possession of the ball for a throw-in at the division line opposite the Scorer's/Timer's Table.

When the penalty for a non-intentional, non-flagrant TF was one free throw and possession of the ball for a throw-in at the division line (and at one time the team had the option as to which side of the court to take its throw-in for all TF's), there was a need for an intentional, non-flagrant TF. Now there is not.

Of course that does not mean that the actions that warrant a TF cannot be deemed intentional by rule, it just is not relevant anymore penalty wise.

MTD, Sr.