Flagrant Technicals
 

I haven't had the experience of issuing a flagrant technical, nor do I really desire it, but I'll issue it if necessary. In your opinions, where do you believe is the line between the usual and the flagrant technical?

I believe it's in 4-19-4. You must know the definition before you can apply your judgment.

ART. 4 . . . A flagrant foul 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 involves dead-ball contact or noncontact at any time which is extreme or persistent, vulgar or abusive conduct. Fighting is a flagrant act.

One example: Player yells at me "That's a bullsh!t call!" = Technical...player yells at me "F@ck you!!" = Flagrant T.

Another example: after whistle for a foul, players get in each other's faces and jaw at each other = Tecnicals...players get in each other's faces and one slams forearm into chin of the other = Flagrant T.

I think the bottom line here is that you will know it when you see it.

Niiiice! They do seem to call themselves.

Now these are what I mean by "lines." Excellent examples. Any others?

Yes. A1 is fouled by B1 in the act of shooting. A1 turns around to B1 and they both push each other in the chest. Technicals. A1 smacks B1 upside the head with a frying pan. Flagrant technical. B1 retaliates by dropping a 50 pound weight on A1's head. Flagrant technical. Coach A looks at me crosseyed. Flagrant technical.

Why is this the image that pops into my mind whenever Padgett talks about his games?

http://images2.fanpop.com/images/pho...83-800-600.jpg

Sure...

Coach does not like my partner - Bhuck Elics - call and jumps up yelling at us = T...coach jumps up yelling and throws his clipboard out onto the court = Flagrant T.

Player gets fouled on lay-up attempt. Turns to defender and yells in his face = T. Player gets fouled during lay-up attempt, tunrs to defender and throws the ball into his face = Flagrant T.

Player dunks over defender and turns to defender and taunts him = T. Player dunks over defender, turns and two-hand shoves him to the floor = Flagrant T.

That is the same example people give for pornography and that ends up with different judgments on what that is. There are many things I have heard people claim they would give a flagrant for that I would never call myself.

Peace

Exactly. That's why I started this discussion, to compare/contrast lines.

I was thinking that. ROFLMAO!

MTD, Sr.

Calling me a cheater will probably get you sent to the bus early. Of course it is all contextual to me. I had a youth football game (different sport but the example still works) where a player on the defense did not like a call one of my fellow officials made and was telling his teammates that that we were cheating them. I dropped a flag for unsportsmanlike conduct on him but did not rule it flagrant.

I had a quick chat with his coach also and explained what the flag was for and that it isn't going to be tolerated. Coach was apologetic and the offensing player was quiet the rest of the game. Message delivered.

Now if a basketball coach is on the sideline screaming at us that we are cheating them...well, that coach just punched his own ticket. I think if a player on a basketball court were to do what the player in my football game did, I would handle it with just a T. But of course, it depends not only what the message they are delivering is, but how they deliver it.

I was not quoting anyone or a particular case. And I really was not referring to Jacobellis v. Ohio which is the case Justice Potter Stewart made the comments about obscenity. The issue was about pornographic images and the standards in a particular community in Ohio. And the issue has been litigated a few times since the original case the Supreme Court ruled on from everything from an issue with the group 2 Live Crew in the 90s and even a book called Lady Chatterly's Lover was also an issue for the court. The issue of obscenity might have been talked about, but at the core it was what pornography could and could not be displayed or consumed by the public in certain communities. Now if you did not know that, maybe you should not comment what I have to say. After all I am going to school in this area of social science. :rolleyes:

Peace

You're majoring in pornography?

Cool!!

Ummm, what do ya have to do for exams?:confused: