My point is that I could still give a satisfactory answer about my decision, given the context of the entire situation, without knowing exactly what was said.

But I'm not going to continue to debate that point anymore. As I said, I know how I would have, have, and likely will handle similar situations.

I'm more interested in exactly how you administered everything that you did call?

A1 committed a foul, which was ruled intentional, not flagrant, then said something, you have no idea what, then B1 slapped A1 across the face. So you ejected both.

How do you justify this, sir?

And your "satisfactory" answer would be?

Taking to another player is an unsporting act when you don't have a clue what was said? Are you serious?

If B1's coach filed a complaint as to why you tossed B1, what's your answer? If their league has a mandatory suspension and asks you the same question before suspending B1, again what's your answer? Are you going to say "I tossed B1 for something she said"? If you do, the response that I know that you're going to get is "What exactly did B1 say to warrant her disqualification?" And your and VaTerp's answer if you're truthful is "I did not hear what B1 said."

Eastshire, I've been involved in complaints like this for many years. I know you and VaTerp aren't going to believe this but you both are going to lose one heckuva lot of credibility with both the league and your association if you start tossing players for something they said when you admittedly didn't hear anything of what they said.

Do what you feel you gotta do though. if guessing is your idea of the correct way to officiate, so be it. I'm just telling you my opinion.

Based on the assumption that I have to give her a T even though I don't know for a fact that she said something, if I look back and see a player falling to the floor and a player from the opposing team near her, I must call a foul on the girl because why else would she have fallen down unless she was fouled by the opponent.

I sure don't want to have to explain that to the coach

The game would then have been over and both coaches discussed it then asked us if they could just continue the game without anyone from the benches being ejected because they just kind of walked out to see what was going on, not to get involved. Even though HS rules don't care why they came out, we agreed to continue the game because we wanted to let the kids play.

Uh, she slipped or tripped over her own feet? Oh wait, that never happens in basketball. :cool:

And I suppose every time a player misses a shot when standing next to a defender you call a shooting foul because, after all, why else would the shooter miss a shot unless fouled by an opponent? :o

Yea, I think you get my point ;) Unless I see the foul committed I am not going to call it and if I don't hear a player taunt I am not automatically going to assume that they did if a player slaps them.

"Right, you don't upgrade the first foul but in this case it's pretty clear there was a second (flagrant technical) foul by the defender. It's a completely separate issue from the first foul."

One could argue that it is clear as mud there was a Flagrant T by defender.

If OP didn't hear what defender said, how do we know she didn't sincerely say to Tall-girl "I am sorry for the intentional foul." ?

Maybe the slap was the result of all the pressure of being taller than everyone in her class building up and she just snapped... (humor me)....

All we DO KNOW is OP called the Intentional Foul.

Anything happening after that is a new and separate issue.

I don't think we can say "Gee that hard foul I called on the defender making a play on the ball seemed to have upset the shooter, guess I better "upgrade" the foul to intentional or flagrant."

That's true. If they're under 12 years old, he just offers them iPods. :D

+1

-2