Flagrant T or not?

[icallfouls]

Originally Posted by Berkut

I don't think that is the case at all - what constitutes a flagrant technical is clearly a matter of judgement, is it not? So how could the rules not "warrant/support" such a call? I can certainly understand the argument that a flagrant is not necessary, but I don't think it is really that cut and dried.

A flagrant foul (technical) is one defined by rule as "displaying unacceptable behavior". I think accusing an official of cheating certainly can be argued to fall under that definition.

If you have to argue your point, your case is not very strong.

Flagrant Foul definition:
...may be a personal or technical foul of a violent or savage nature, or a technical noncontact foul which displays unacceptable conduct. It may or may not be intentional. If personal, it involves, but is not limited to violent contact such as: striking, kicking, and kneeing. If technical, it involved deadball contact or noncontact at any time which is extreme or persistent, vulgar, or abusive conduct. Fighting is a flagrant act.

You can't get there in this case.

Additionally, nothing in 10.4 - 5 supports your case for flagrant.