Whaddya got?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

For the record, there is an argument to be made that the punch would be considered "fighting" and thus should be penalized as a flagrant T regardless of whether it's dead ball or live ball contact.

That was how I was instructed, after the fact, to call a particular fight in a game I worked several years ago in Iowa.

Too bad that you were instructed such. That is incorrect. Fighting is a flagrant technical foul when done during a dead ball, but a flagrant personal when done during a live ball. See these two case plays.

In the first the ball is dead following the dunk. Then there is a noncontact unsporting T for the taunt, which becomes an act of fighting when the opponent retaliates with the punch.

FIGHTING

4.18.2 SITUATION:

A1 dunks over B1 and then taunts B1. B1 retaliates and
punches A1. RULING: Both A1 and B1 are charged with a flagrant technical foul
for fighting and are disqualified. A1’s action is defined as fighting when the taunting
caused B1 to retaliate by fighting. (10-3; 10-3-6c: 10-3-8)

In this second one, there is nothing to make the ball dead prior to the first illegal contact, so the fouls are personal.

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))

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Not just an argument, that is what the rule is.

DEAD WRONG!!!