|
Tue Jan 28, 2003, 02:39pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
So flagrant acts are not intentional? They are unintentional. Seems strange... accidentally flagrant. Sounds like a fart... accidental but oh so offendingly flagrant.... or is that fragrant? Ahh I'm arguing English semantics not rules.
I agree Bob. Rule 10-3-9 makes the differentiation for a player technical as "intentionally or flagrantly contacting an opponent..." So what is your answer to the original question Bob? How is a flagrant foul administered? How do you tell the coaches/audience that a flagrant foul has been committed? Also, reading the note at the end of section 10-3, I get the feeling that there is no ejection for a PERSONAL flagrant foul - only for the technical flagrant. Is that right? What are some other examples of a flagrant act besides fighting? I had assumed that flagrant acts included some deliberateness... some intention.
__________________
"There are no superstar calls. We don't root for certain teams. We don't cheat. But sometimes we just miss calls." - Joe Crawford 
|
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Threaded Mode
