|
|||
This statement is misleading, suggesting that fighting is always (at least) a double foul.
__________________
Cheers, mb |
|
|||
Quote:
I have heard it stated that a fight starts with either the beginning of the first punch or the act which provoked it. Either way, the ball is dead at this point, so the sequence afterward is irrelevant. I subscribe to this theory.
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum. It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow. Lonesome Dove Last edited by just another ref; Thu Jan 27, 2011 at 02:19pm. |
|
|||
Okay, I see your point. It takes two to make a fight. But if only one punches, and the other
a. runs away b. takes it without a response c. falls to the floor only one is penalized. But even in this case, can fighting be a personal foul? A single punch, perhaps. Anything beyond that, the penalty encompasses the entire action, part of which happens after the ball is dead, making it a T. Yes?
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum. It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow. Lonesome Dove |
|
||||
Quote:
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners. |
|
||||
Quote:
10-3-8 lays out the penalty, a "flagrant foul." While it doesn't specify P or T, it falls in the technical section. When I had a fight break out a few years ago, it was what normally would be a flagrant personal (bear-hug wrestling take down) followed by retaliation. The state (Iowa) told me we should have ruled a double T (plus another T for a teammate jumping into the mix). I'm not saying they were right, but it gives a bit of insight into the mindset at the top.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners. |
|
|||
Quote:
The situation where is truly matters in my view is if you have an isolated act.
__________________
Even if you’re on the right track, you’ll get run over if you just sit there. - Will Rogers |
|
|||
Quote:
Since a fight is the combative act that exists with or without contact, I'm going with the T if I deem it a fight. It doesn't make sense to have a lessor penalty for contact than for no contact (who shoots...specific player or any player). Another option is that you could deem the act a flagrant personal foul but not a fight. It doesn't really matter since the player will be ejected. Sure, the shooter may change and the throwin spot may change, but those are not really major in this particular scenario compared to the ejection/suspension of the player.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association Last edited by Camron Rust; Thu Jan 27, 2011 at 02:58pm. |
|
||||
Quote:
We screwed up the FTs some how; probably adrenaline and a whole bunch of issues. I ruled a FP on B1, followed by two FTs on A1 and A2. A FT followed on B1 for behavior on the bench before we could shoot any shots. Based on that ruling, we should have shot free throws for every foul. I can't remember what we did with free throws, but it wasn't correct. Based on the state ruling, we should have had Double Ts (on A1 and B1) followed by separate Ts on A2 and B1 (false double). Shoot B's shots, then go down and shoot A's shots. Ball to A at division line. The way I read the rule now, I'd be inclined to say the state had it right. To me, I'd rather give the harshest penalty justifiable, which would mean (in the video) a T since anyone can shoot.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners. |
|
|||
Quote:
I can live with both what you and Camron are saying. The important thing is to get the offender(s) out of there and the reports filed.
__________________
Even if you’re on the right track, you’ll get run over if you just sit there. - Will Rogers |
|
|||
Quote:
And I am not under the impression that fighting is always a dead ball foul as it can take place during a live ball. That being said if that is the case I am sure this is in the definitions. Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble." ----------------------------------------------------------- Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010) |
|
|||
Quote:
See case book play 10.4.5SitA re: opponents punching each other during a live ball. Note the RULING that states "A1 and B1 are charged with flagrant fouls and are disqualified, but no free throws result from the double PERSONAL flagrant fouls." Couldn't be clearer. Note that also dovetails in neatly with the description of flagrant fouls in 4-19-4....."A flagrant foul may be a personal or technical foul of a violent or savage nature.... If personal, it involves, but is not limited to violent contact such as striking, kicking and kneeing. .... Fighting is a flagrant act." Also note that the definition of fighting as defined in rule 4-19-1 is "an attempt to strike, punch or kick..." Fighting during a live ball is a flagrant personal foul, by rule. Fighting during a dead ball is a flagrant technical foul, by rule. |
|
|||
Quote:
|
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
can offside rule be made easier and better? | Steven Gottlieb | Soccer | 11 | Wed Dec 08, 2004 10:00am |
Even easier T | w_sohl | Basketball | 11 | Fri Dec 19, 2003 01:14pm |
New FED rule: appeals required, made easier | Patrick Szalapski | Baseball | 33 | Thu Oct 18, 2001 02:06pm |