The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 27, 2011, 02:15pm
We don't rent pigs
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbyron View Post
How about 4-18?

I'm penalizing a landed punch with a flagrant personal foul because of the contact. Although the contact was preceded by the "attempt" referred to in 4-18-1, I'm not penalizing that separately.

That's similar to the idea that contacting the ball while it's still in the thrower's hands is a T, despite being preceded by a throwing-plane violation.

Any flagrant fouls after the first one will be T's because the ball is dead.
4-18-1 goes on to use the phrase ''regardless of whether contact is made."
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.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 27, 2011, 02:24pm
We don't rent pigs
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,627
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
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Thu Jan 27, 2011, 03:14pm
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref View Post
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?
You can also consider the person that "instigated" the fight as also part of the fight if they did not throw a single punch. In other words if the person says, "Your mom wears combat boots" and the opponent reacts and punches the person as a result, then you gets both of them. But that is not automatic at all or what the rule says.

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)
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


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


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:00pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1