The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Swing and a miss (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/85625-swing-miss.html)

Welpe Wed Jan 11, 2012 11:18am

Swing and a miss
 
Here's one for the group to ponder. Hard (but common) foul called on B1. A1 takes exception to this and right after the whistle, takes an open handed slap at B1 but misses. Options?

Adam Wed Jan 11, 2012 11:24am

Close down while you call the T. Consider going flagrant. It may not be a punch, but it's close. It would probably depend on how hard the swing was.

Toren Wed Jan 11, 2012 11:25am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Welpe (Post 812305)
Here's one for the group to ponder. Hard (but common) foul called on B1. A1 takes exception to this and right after the whistle, takes an open handed slap at B1 but misses. Options?

Attempt to strike is a fight by definition. A1 gets tossed immediately. Consider upgrading the initial foul.

That's my take.

JRutledge Wed Jan 11, 2012 11:27am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Welpe (Post 812305)
Here's one for the group to ponder. Hard (but common) foul called on B1. A1 takes exception to this and right after the whistle, takes an open handed slap at B1 but misses. Options?

Fighting is defined has actions that do not involve contact. I probably would go that route and get rid of A1.

Peace

jTheUmp Wed Jan 11, 2012 11:32am

Flagrant T for fighting. Attempting to fight and failing is still fighting.

PG_Ref Wed Jan 11, 2012 11:35am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Welpe (Post 812305)
Here's one for the group to ponder. Hard (but common) foul called on B1. A1 takes exception to this and right after the whistle, takes an open handed slap at B1 but misses. Options?

In our neck of the woods, this would be considered fighting ... flagrant act T.

letemplay Wed Jan 11, 2012 11:44am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toren (Post 812309)
Attempt to strike is a fight by definition. A1 gets tossed immediately. Consider upgrading the initial foul.

That's my take.

Upgrade initial to intentional? Flagrant?

tref Wed Jan 11, 2012 11:46am

Coach: Why is he ejected, he missed!!
Official: Should've got his moneys worth, goodnight! :D

Toren Wed Jan 11, 2012 11:53am

Quote:

Originally Posted by letemplay (Post 812320)
Upgrade initial to intentional? Flagrant?

Definitely a conference to figure out if an upgrade is warranted. Just from pure reading the OP it's hard to determine, but in an actual game, I could easily see the initial foul being a hard foul getting upgraded to either intentional or flagrant.

Flagrant only if we think it was intended to provoke the fight.

Since this is all hypothetical, the only sure thing I know is the kid who swung and missed is getting a Flagrant and ejected. Everything else is academic.

Welpe Wed Jan 11, 2012 11:53am

Hm...well thank you for the responses. This happened during one of my 7th grade girls games on Monday. I assessed a technical but not a flagrant. The slap seemed to be more of a "get off me" / frustrated reaction than anything else and a flagrant did not seem to fit the crime. I know that fighting does not require contact but it didn't seem right to call this act fighting. Guess I need to reconsider my thought process here.

Also no way the foul by B1 should have been upgraded, it wasn't even close to intentional nor was it excessive contact.

Toren Wed Jan 11, 2012 11:54am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Welpe (Post 812323)
Hm...well thank you for the responses. This happened during one of my 7th grade girls games on Monday. I assessed a technical but not a flagrant. The slap seemed to me more of a "get off me" / frustrated reaction than anything else and a flagrant did not seem to fit the crime to me. I know that fighting does not require contact but it didn't seem right to call this act fighting. Maybe I will reconsider.

Also no way the foul by B1 should have been upgraded, it wasn't even close to intentional nor was it excessive contact.

Good conference. Report, foul, flagrant foul. Administer in that order. :D

mbyron Wed Jan 11, 2012 11:59am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Welpe (Post 812323)
Hm...well thank you for the responses. This happened during one of my 7th grade girls games on Monday. I assessed a technical but not a flagrant. The slap seemed to be more of a "get off me" / frustrated reaction than anything else and a flagrant did not seem to fit the crime. I know that fighting does not require contact but it didn't seem right to call this act fighting. Guess I need to reconsider my thought process here.

Also no way the foul by B1 should have been upgraded, it wasn't even close to intentional nor was it excessive contact.

I like that for 7th grade girls. A T seems about right: serious penalty for the infraction, but DQ probably not warranted. She'll learn from that and fix it; or not, and get tossed when she does it in a JV game. Kudos.

Adam Wed Jan 11, 2012 12:25pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Welpe (Post 812323)
Hm...well thank you for the responses. This happened during one of my 7th grade girls games on Monday. I assessed a technical but not a flagrant. The slap seemed to be more of a "get off me" / frustrated reaction than anything else and a flagrant did not seem to fit the crime. I know that fighting does not require contact but it didn't seem right to call this act fighting. Guess I need to reconsider my thought process here.

Also no way the foul by B1 should have been upgraded, it wasn't even close to intentional nor was it excessive contact.

I honestly think you handled it correctly, assuming the movie in my brain matches what happened. I'm thinking more of a reactive flail than a premeditated attempt to strike the opponent.

just another ref Wed Jan 11, 2012 01:33pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 812336)
I honestly think you handled it correctly, assuming the movie in my brain matches what happened. I'm thinking more of a reactive flail than a premeditated attempt to strike the opponent.


good terminology

+1

Eastshire Wed Jan 11, 2012 01:52pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Welpe (Post 812323)
Hm...well thank you for the responses. This happened during one of my 7th grade girls games on Monday. I assessed a technical but not a flagrant. The slap seemed to be more of a "get off me" / frustrated reaction than anything else and a flagrant did not seem to fit the crime. I know that fighting does not require contact but it didn't seem right to call this act fighting. Guess I need to reconsider my thought process here.

Also no way the foul by B1 should have been upgraded, it wasn't even close to intentional nor was it excessive contact.

The dividing line for me is how the slap is delivered and where it's aimed. If it's a pushing motion aimed below the shoulders, I'm thinking technical (because this usually feels like a defensive action to me). If it's swung or aimed above the shoulders, I'm thinking flagrant (because this feels offensive to me).

A "get off me" is usually going to be a straight technical if severe enough to be anything.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:43pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1