Swinging Elbows

[PG_Ref]

Originally Posted by mbyron

For NFHS, Rule 4-23-1.

Yep ... the nose that gets there first, belongs

[Adam]

Originally Posted by PG_Ref

Yep ... the nose that gets there first, belongs

As BktBallRef alludes to, if B1 leans over A1, who pivots elbows out in the process of straightening up or even squaring up, it's likely going to be a no-call unless A1's elbow is somehow damaged.

[PG_Ref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

As BktBallRef alludes to, if B1 leans over A1, who pivots elbows out in the process of straightening up or even squaring up, it's likely going to be a no-call unless A1's elbow is somehow damaged.

Perhaps true, but based on the OP, I was going on the presumption that we have swinging elbows VS elbows moving via normal pivoting ...

[AHSAA_Ref]

My President says if the elbows do not move faster than the torso, it is not a violation or foul.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

if B1 leans over A1, who pivots elbows out in the process of straightening up or even squaring up, it's likely going to be a no-call unless A1's elbow is somehow damaged.

Since this thread started with reference to the NCAA rules, I just want to remind everyone that the statement above is FALSE in NCAA games.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Since this thread started with reference to the NCAA rules, I just want to remind everyone that the statement above is FALSE in NCAA games.

So under what circumstance is a no-call acceptable when elbows make contact with face?

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

So under what circumstance is a no-call acceptable when elbows make contact with face?

Only when the elbow is NOT moving.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by AHSAA_Ref

My President says if the elbows do not move faster than the torso, it is not a violation or foul.

Your President probably said that because the rules told him to say that. Just saying...

NFHS rule 4-24-8(a) and NCAA rule 4-36-7(a). Note though that both of those rules also go on to say that you can still call a foul or violation if you deem that the aggression(speed and vigor) of the elbow swing could cause injury if contact was made.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by AHSAA_Ref

My President says if the elbows do not move faster than the torso, it is not a violation or foul.

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Your President probably said that because the rules told him to say that. Just saying...
...

It's never a foul?

If A1 has the ball face level with his elbows out and pivots his entire body and his elbow contacts B1, who has established and maintained a legal guarding position, it's not a foul? Nevvver? (in my Bill Maher squeaky voice).

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by AHSAA_Ref

My President says if the elbows do not move faster than the torso, it is not a violation or foul.

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

It's never a foul?

If A1 has the ball face level with his elbows out and pivots his entire body and his elbow contacts B1, who has established and maintained a legal guarding position, it's not a foul? Nevvver? (in my Bill Maher squeaky voice).

The part in red is why you're . AHSAA_Ref never mentioned contact. If a player's elbows are not moving faster than the torso, it's not excessive (by definition). Therefore, no violation or foul.

And even if there is contact, NFHS does not mandate that it must be a foul. At the high school level, officials are still allowed to exercise judgment about whether it was incidental or not.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Your President probably said that because the rules told him to say that. Just saying...

NFHS rule 4-24-8(a) and NCAA rule 4-36-7(a). Note though that both of those rules also go on to say that you can still call a foul or violation if you deem that the aggression(speed and vigor) of the elbow swing could cause injury if contact was made.

Yo, BadNews...

Miss the red-highlighted part?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Yo, BadNews...

Miss the red-highlighted part?

I was focused on the "never a foul" statement since AASHA didn't quote which post he was responding to.