|
Fri Feb 07, 2003, 11:39pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
I have seen, in three of four games I have called on a certain floor this year, an elbow to the head. I called one of them and ejected the player. In two others my partner called them one was player control, the other was called intentional. I would like your thoughts on which you would call and where you draw the line between each of those options.
|
|
Sat Feb 08, 2003, 12:10am
|
|||
|
|||
|
I had a 'bow foul tonight. Two players get tangled up, and B1 goes to the floor. The ball goes to the other side of the floor and a shot goes up. B1 flys across the floor and nails A1 with an elbow/forearm to the chest. I called an intentional foul AND counted the basket! If he had hit him in the head, I would have tossed him.
Not to say I would always do that but that's just the example I had from tonight.
__________________
"...as cool as the other side of the pillow." - Stuart Scott "You should never be proud of doing the right thing." - Dean Smith
|
|
Sat Feb 08, 2003, 12:59am
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'm lucky, I've only had 1-2 actual elbowing fouls in my entire career (of course, now I've jinxed myself, I'll probably have three in the Varsity Tourney game I have tomorrow).
The PC type usually happens when ball-carrier is tightly guarded or trapped by multiple players...often after securing a rebound, with the other team pressing the other way. The ball-carrier is trying to pivot or get clear to pass. He may swing the elbows while pivoting, and nail someone...bang, PC foul. The intentional/flagarant comes in where there is a clear attempt to elbow that is not at all related to the situation mentioned previously. For me, whether or not the player gets chucked depends, and every situation is likely different. But any player that deliberately swings an elbow and connects above the chest is likely to get the heave-ho from me. The only flagarant fouls I've had to chuck someone for were two-handers in the back during layups. Nasty stuff.
|
|
Sat Feb 08, 2003, 01:10am
|
|||
|
|||
|
this is what I tell my young officials in differentiating between player control, intentional, technical, and merely a violation.
If the player is merely "clearing out" by swinging elbows, with the defense a safe distance away, I tell them to go with the violation. This lets the coaches and fans know that you DID address the elbows, and also sends a message to the othe players that we aren't having that tonight. If the player uses an elbow to slowly "push off" an opponent, then you can go with the player contol foul in that case. Again, the speed of the player's arms is a big factor here. If the player throws one with a good level of speed to the body and makes contact, go with the technical in this instance. The fact that contact was made, demands that the penalty be harsher than the above. Anything to the head WITH CONTACT is flagrant with no exceptions. A swing and a miss is a tech, swing and a HIT is a ticket outa here for the rest of the game. These guidelines have helped me differentiate accomadating the new violation option, and helped my younger officials blow their whistle more quickly when this situation occurs. The whole idea of having the option of the violation is to get some kind of penalty on the player throwing bows even if there isn't contact or malice involved. The mere act warrants some kind of officials response..
|
|
Sat Feb 08, 2003, 01:14am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Good point about the violation, Jeremy....forgot to mention that one. I've dinged that one a few times, not too many, but a couple per season. The addition of an elbow violation was one of the smartest rule changes ever, IMO.
|
|
Sat Feb 08, 2003, 01:26am
|
|||
|
|||
I concur..and have called it quite a few times this season...
|
|
Sat Feb 08, 2003, 05:04am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
In the second situation,a swing and a miss is a violation if the ball is alive,by rule also,not a technical foul.Rule 9-13-1 plus Penalty in NFHS covers it.The terminology "excessive" is already used to justify a violation being called.
|
|
Sat Feb 08, 2003, 02:31pm
|
|||
|
|||
Well, then I will kill the ball first with my whistle!
In all reality, nobody is going to argue with a tech in that situation in my opinion.
|
|
Sat Feb 08, 2003, 02:52pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I edited this to add another thought.It sure can make a difference,if that player now gets a second T in that game.Now he's disqualified and possibly suspended,depending on his local rules.You might get some argument after you put that report in,if someone wants to appeal it. [Edited by Jurassic Referee on Feb 8th, 2003 at 02:10 PM]
|
|
Sat Feb 08, 2003, 04:41pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
[/B][/QUOTE] J.R., Are you referring specifically to the situation or referring to T's overall? There are specific situations where we do call a T during a live ball (i.e. taunting), just not for contact during a live ball. Just wanted to clear that up. Of course you are correct that the situation presented would be either a violation if there was not any contact or a personal foul if they did make contact. Severity would dictate whether it is intentional or flagrant. Our state association has described the violation as "swing and return in the same plane". I think that is a reasonable interpretation of excessively swinging the elbows without contact. Mregor
|
|
Sat Feb 08, 2003, 05:06pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Are you referring specifically to the situation or referring to T's overall? There are specific situations where we do call a T during a live ball (i.e. taunting), just not for contact during a live ball. Just wanted to clear that up. Of course you are correct that the situation presented would be either a violation if there was not any contact or a personal foul if they did make contact. Severity would dictate whether it is intentional or flagrant. Our state association has described the violation as "swing and return in the same plane". I think that is a reasonable interpretation of excessively swinging the elbows without contact. Mregor [/B][/QUOTE]Roger,I was referring to Jeremy's specific post,which was giving a T for elbow contact during a live ball,by a player with the ball.I know(as you stated above)that you sure can have technical fouls during a live ball-but they are non-contact by rule also.I thought Texas played NCAA rules,but that might be football only.There's a big difference in the penalties,with the POI used in NCAA.
|
|
Sat Feb 08, 2003, 06:03pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
[/B][/QUOTE]Roger,I was referring to Jeremy's specific post,which was giving a T for elbow contact during a live ball,by a player with the ball.I know(as you stated above)that you sure can have technical fouls during a live ball-but they are non-contact by rule also.I thought Texas played NCAA rules,but that might be football only.There's a big difference in the penalties,with the POI used in NCAA. [/B][/QUOTE]
That's what I thought, just wanted to make sure it read that way for everyone. Got to get back to the brown pops... Mregor
|
|
Sat Feb 08, 2003, 07:35pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
I stand corrected gentlemen...and thanks!
|
|
Sat Feb 08, 2003, 07:52pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
bad elbow by player, you wanna toss him = flagarant bad elbow by player during play, but not severe enough to warrant ejection = intentional foul Is this right?
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Linear Mode
