Flagrant/Intentional

[Welpe]

Never mind...case of the Mondays got me.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by jTheUmp

Ok, so let's say we call the foul on B1, and then A1 retaliates after the whistle for B's foul. Then B1 gets the common foul, and A1 is disqualified with a Flagrant T, correct?

4) Throw-in for B at division line opposite table.

Did I get that right?

Originally Posted by Welpe

Almost but this one is not correct.

Seems right to me. . .

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Welpe

Almost but this one is not correct.

Why not?

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Why not?

Ugh...because I'm an idiot?

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I cannot tell if this is a "get off me" shove or a full out punch to the chest of face.

Peace

For me, a "get off me" shove to the head is going to still be flagrant. I'm more tolerant of a "get off me" shove to the torso, but we shouldn't tolerate contact to the head.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

For me, a "get off me" shove to the head is going to still be flagrant. I'm more tolerant of a "get off me" shove to the torso, but we shouldn't tolerate contact to the head.

It looked like the head to me, but I'm not sure from the angle of the camera. You're right, though, if the "get off me shove" goes to the head, I'm going flagrant.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

For me, a "get off me" shove to the head is going to still be flagrant. I'm more tolerant of a "get off me" shove to the torso, but we shouldn't tolerate contact to the head.

I am not calling that automatically flagrant as I would need to see why they are reacting that way. I cannot tell how much of their arm the defender has. Players do that often in games and especially when the game is getting a little chippy. That is why I said I would need a better angle to make that determination.

Peace

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am not calling that automatically flagrant as I would need to see why they are reacting that way. I cannot tell how much of their arm the defender has. Players do that often in games and especially when the game is getting a little chippy. That is why I said I would need a better angle to make that determination.

Peace

I understand your position; I just don't agree with it. For me, no provocation is sufficient that a blow to the head will not be flagrant.

My question for you is what could B being doing here that you won't toss A for a blow to the head?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

I understand your position; I just don't agree with it. For me, no provocation is sufficient that a blow to the head will not be flagrant.

My question for you is what could B being doing here that you won't toss A for a blow to the head?

I was not asking you to agree with it. I have been doing this long enough where you see players push away arms or hands all the time. If I called a flagrant foul every time that happen I would have one every week.

Also I do not know if it was a blow to the head. And it would not matter if it was a blow to the head or to the chest, if it is a punch it is a punch. That is different than trying to get someone's hand or arm off of you and trying to push that away.

Peace

[IUgrad92]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

I understand your position; I just don't agree with it. For me, no provocation is sufficient that a blow to the head will not be flagrant.

My question for you is what could B being doing here that you won't toss A for a blow to the head?

There is no justification. But you're debating a play with someone who said there was contact made by Blue, eventhough there is no evidence to support that claim.