What Do You Have Here??

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

This is exactly what I thought when I read "he didn't think it was violent enough". Just didn't get here fast enough.

There are obviously non-flagrant fouls that can be committed with the leg (accidental trip, blocking, etc.), but in a situation where a player intentional extends the leg to strike an opponent. . . he gone!

Let me ask this, because I think I'm envisioning this play differently.

Would it be different if the player attempted to trip his opponent as opposed to an attempt to kick his opponent?

Edit:

Originally Posted by NCHSAA

Contact was made on the torso/lower side of A1.

I missed this part, and now I'm picturing the play differently.

Flagrant personal.

The observer is still full of crap for suggesting an unsporting T for a contact foul.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

This is exactly what I thought when I read "he didn't think it was violent enough". Just didn't get here fast enough.

There are obviously non-flagrant fouls that can be committed with the leg (accidental trip, blocking, etc.), but in a situation where a player intentional extends the leg to strike an opponent. . . he gone!

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Edit:

I missed this part, and now I'm picturing the play differently.

Flagrant personal.

The observer is still full of crap for suggesting an unsporting T for a contact foul.

Great...I was beginning to wonder why no other posters were seeing it as flagrant.