Flagrant or Intentional?

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Impossible. There's no such foul and there never has been. You can have a flagrant personal foul or you can have a flagrant intentional foul.

The sentence "it may or may not be intentional" in rule 4-19-4 has been completely misinterpreted by some people. The word "intentional" refers to the act being deliberate in nature, not the type of foul.

And if you think differently, call or e-mail your IAABO national interpreter before going into one of your famous 10,000 word filibusters.

Again, there is NO such animal as a flagrant intentional personal foul.

Perhaps I'm mistaken (very possible) or perhaps you've mis-typed (possible, I suppose), but I believe there can be either a flagrant personal foul or a flagrant technical foul. No such thing as a flagrant intentional foul.

You can, of course, have an intentional personal foul or an intentional technical foul.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

Perhaps I'm mistaken (very possible) or perhaps you've mis-typed (possible, I suppose), but I believe there can be either a flagrant personal foul or a flagrant technical foul. No such thing as a flagrant intentional foul.
You can, of course, have an intentional personal foul or an intentional technical foul.

You disagreed with him and virtually quoted him at the same time. Another way to put it would be, "There's no such thing as a flagrant intentional foul, personal or technical."

IOW (one more time), there's no such thing as a flagrant intentional personal foul or a flagrant intentional technical foul.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

You disagreed with him and virtually quoted him at the same time.

Well, I'm glad we agree, but:

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Impossible. There's no such foul and there never has been. You can have a flagrant personal foul or you can have a flagrant intentional foul.

Like I said, either I'm wrong, or Jurassic mis-typed (which is what I believe happened). I think he meant to write flagrant technical foul where I quoted in red. Or he's wrong, which I doubt in this instance.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

Well, I'm glad we agree, but:


Like I said, either I'm wrong, or Jurassic mis-typed (which is what I believe happened). I think he meant to write flagrant technical foul where I quoted in red. Or he's wrong, which I doubt in this instance.

Uh, never mind. Gotcha.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

Perhaps I'm mistaken (very possible) or perhaps you've mis-typed (possible, I suppose), but I believe there can be either a flagrant personal foul or a flagrant technical foul. No such thing as a flagrant intentional foul.

You can, of course, have an intentional personal foul or an intentional technical foul.

Aw geeze, I was in such a hurry to make my point that I screwed up myself. You're 100% correct. I went back and corrected my post.

Thanks. Appreciated.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Aw geeze, I was in such a hurry to make my point that I screwed up myself. You're 100% correct. I went back and corrected my post.

Thanks. Appreciated.

Figured that's exactly what you meant, but since we're talking about specific language here I wanted to be sure. I still find myself learning new things that I was previously very certain on to take anything for granted.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Aw geeze, I was in such a hurry to make my point that I screwed up myself. You're 100% correct. I went back and corrected my post.

Thanks. Appreciated.

I don't know who you are anymore.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I don't know who you are anymore.

Shut up.

[Adam]

Now I feel all warm and fuzzy. Thanks.

[just another ref]

With regard to the OP, (remember the OP, back before we got all warm and fuzzy?) if anybody smacks anybody "forcefully in the face" and there is "no doubt at all it was done intentionally," it sounds flagrant to me.