![]() |
|
|
|
|||
|
Quote:
Stationary: Common, intentional or flagrant, whether above or below the shoulders (although I'm having a hard time coming up with an example of I or F in this case) Excessively Swinging (as in the definition): Flagrant, whether above or below the shoulders. Swinging, but not excessively: Above the shoulders -- I or F; Below the Shoulders -- C, I or F |
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR |
|
|||
|
Quote:
Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble." ----------------------------------------------------------- Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010) |
|
|||
|
Quote:
4. What has NOT changed for the 2010-2011 season. a. Officials determine what is legal/incidental contact. This type of contact is still not a foul. (Rule 4-40) b. Officials determine what is illegal/non-incidental contact. This type of contact is still a foul. (Rule 4-40; 4-29.2) c. A foul caused by a STATIONARY (not moving or swinging) elbow is still a common foul. (4-36.1, .3, .4, .5 and .6; 4-29.2.a) d. A foul caused by swinging the elbows EXCESSIVELY is still a flagrant foul. (4-36.7; 4- 29.2.c and .f) e. Officials are permitted to review the monitor to see IF a contact flagrant foul has occurred. When it is determined that a contact flagrant foul did not occur, but an intentional personal or player/substitute technical has occurred, these acts and only these acts can be penalized. (Rule 2-13.2.d) |
|
|||
|
Key is swinging/moving
While much of the emphasis has been placed on the above/below the shoulders language I believe the real key is the swinging/moving elbow language as if the elbow is stationary and contact is made to an opponent above the shoulders, a common foul can be called (an intentional may still be called but a common fould can still be called by rule). IF the elbow is swinging/moving AND contact is made above the shoulders then a common foul is no longer an option and the foul called must either be an intentational foul or a flagrant foul (personal of technical depending of the status of the ball).
|
|
|||
|
Quote:
![]() Or are you referring strictly to NCAA Womens rules? |
|
|||
|
Quote:
Actually, I think the "clarifications" and "addendum's" will come flying before we hit Christmas. From what was demonstrated during the summer an elbow to the head deemed a foul is Intentional or Flagrant. Example: Player sets a screen with elbows out at shoulder level. Defender takes the elbow in the head. Intentional, regardless if the elbows moved or not. If they take it in the shoulder etc then common. That is not to say I have not heard your interp either. As for me, I will err on the side of caution and go INT. That seems to be the tact "They" are wanting us to take. |
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| College question | Nagy0716 | Basketball | 17 | Wed Oct 28, 2009 03:19pm |
| A question for those of you who do both HS and college | Mark Padgett | Basketball | 16 | Mon Nov 06, 2006 02:53pm |
| College question | Junker | Basketball | 17 | Wed Sep 28, 2005 01:36pm |
| Question - Swinging Elbows - Tech or Violation | bradfordwilkins | Basketball | 5 | Sun Feb 20, 2005 09:25pm |
| Excessively swinging of arms or elbows, violation question? | jritchie | Basketball | 14 | Tue Oct 12, 2004 09:31am |