Easier for us to see...
 

I hope I have posted a video I ran across today. I think the L did not see the contact. He only saw action and reaction. The call was correct from where I sit, but what I understand from the "you have to see the contact" crowd, it shouldn't have been called. The contact, if it happend, was on the opposite side of the players head from where the L was standing. L does not know contact occurred.

Just watch the video.

Cosby Sweaters Grade School Basketball Game Sucker Punch!

I'm in the "punch of any kind whether there's contact or not should get the same reaction from the official" crowd

That's a big assumption to make. You do realize that the player should be assessed a flagrant personal foul for fighting even if he does not make contact in this situation, correct?

He could easily see the punching action, no need to see contact here. <strike>I noticed he incorrectly calls a T, but that's a minor issue here.</strike>

Edit: Scratch that, a Flagrant T is the proper call for fighting regardless of live ball/dead ball or contact/no contact.

Since contact doesn't need to be made on a situation like this, it doesn't matter if contact is seen or not. Green 34 is ejected for his actions.

Then he's fined $1,500 for commenting on the play using social media. ;)

Is that your final answer? ;)

What do you mean he didn't make contact? Didn't you see that kid go down and the pain he is obvioulsy in? Wow! Must have been solid contact. Soccer must be his springtime sport.

Dirty sucker punch. Uncalled for no matter how you look at it. Gone!

Yep. Fighting is 10-3-8, and it doesn't specify anything about contact or live ball. Section 10-3 is labeled "player technical."

What about 4-19-4?

Also, 8.7 Situation A:

8.7 SITUATION A: A1 is attempting the second free throw of a two-shot foul.
While the second free throw is in flight, A2 and B1 punch each other simultaneously.

RULING: Both A2 and B1 are disqualified for fighting. Since this is a double
personal foul, no free throws are awarded. The ball is put in play at the point
of interruption. If A1's free throw is successful, Team B is awarded a throw-in
from anywhere along the end line. If A1's free throw is unsuccessful, the alternating-
possession procedure is used. (4-19-8; 6-4-3g; 7-5-3b; 4-36; 10-3-8; 10
Penalty 1c, 8a(1))




Similar verbiage found in 10.4.5 Situation A

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.

Fighting takes at least 2, so if it's a double flagrant, it really doesn't matter whether it's personal or technical, the penalty is the same.

I like the reaction by the camera, "What?" when the official is escorting the player to the bench for ejection.

I don't see that anyone said their was no contact. I only see posts that say it was not necessary to see the contact....it would be a flagrant T for fighting in any case.

Not true.

4-18

Fighting is a flagrant act and can occur when the ball is dead or live. Fighting
includes, but is not limited to combative acts such as:

ART. 1 . . . An attempt to strike, punch or kick by using a fist, hands, arms, legs or feet regardless of whether contact is made.

A single player taking a swing at another and missing is enough for a flagrant personal / technical foul for fighting.

Where do you get that idea?