Ejection math 101
 

1 Flagrant foul = 1 ejection
2 technical fouls = 1 ejection
3 HC indirect technicals= 1 ejection
What do 2 intentional fouls = ?


The reason I ask is because I have been reading that REALLY long thread about the two big fellas from Connell that were fouling like crazy and now went viral on you tube and someone said that 2 intentional won't get some one ejected. So do intentional count toward personal foul count or technical foul count? (and team count of course.)

Are you sure you aren't talking about a HS game from Connell High School? Under NFHS rules, a player is DQ'd after 1 flagrant foul, so you'd never have the opportunity to penalize 2.

I think the point of some of those comments is that, although the fouls were flagrant, the officials did not call flagrant fouls.

NCAA is different, now that they have 2 classes of "flagrant" foul.

You'll need to link to the post where that was said, because I'm not sure what you're asking. 1 flagrant foul = ejection. (NFHS) 2 would just mean added information to the report; but the only way a second flagrant is happening is if the player does it from the bench.

And it's not really ejection for players, it's disqualification.

Don't trust the rule knowledge of those commenting on Youtube videos, especially one like this.

As others have said, one flagrant foul in NFHS is a DQ. Many fans, coaches and even some officials will call a foul flagrant when they really mean intentional because the NBA (and recently now NCAA) use that terminology.

Sorry i meant intentional. I edited my OP. Do two intentional fouls equal ejection?

No.

No, only technicals are two and done.

Difference between flagrant and intentional?
 

I worked a girls 8th grade game yesterday and had an intentional foul call. A1 had the ball. B1 grabbed it away from her (no contact) and then A1 pushed B1 in the back with both hands. After I reported it, my partner (a young guy) asked what would have made me call it flagrant instead of intentional. I told him that if the push would have knocked the girl down or would have made her stumble across the floor, I would have called it flagrant. He just nodded and said, "Oh yeah. I see." I thought the original call was the right one. No complaint from the coach, either.

BTW - both teams double bonus both halves. Yuck. :o

So in theory you can have 5 intentionals in a game?

In theory.

Yup, although it's doubtful a coach would let a player who's doing that stay in.

In theory yes but I think by the third, I am highly considering upgrading it to a flagrant.

There it is. I've never been in this position, but a second intentional foul, depending on severity of contact, would probably warrant a flagrant from me.

Last week in a game between Golden State Warriors and the Orlando Magic, the Warriors were Intentionally fouling Dwight Howard (grabbing him without the ball) to put him on the free throw line (he had 39 attempts). From the highlights that I saw, even though they were Intentional, they was nothing that would raise to the level Flagrant, if it would have been in a high school. So just because there is many intentional foul, that does not mean you escalate to flagrant fouls.

The responses here are hinting at 1 feature of the rules and 1 feature of how the game is called:

Rules: by rule, there is no limit on the number of intentional personal or intentional technical fouls that can be called on a player, as such. The standard limit of 5 personal or 2 technical fouls in a game still result in disqualification.

Calling it: an intentional personal foul is called when either a player uses excessive force or neutralizes an opponent's obvious advantage. For the latter, few will seriously consider "upgrading" to a flagrant.

If a player has gotten an INT for excessive force, many would consider that a kind of "warning" to the player and coach that this level of force is not appropriate for the game. A second or third such foul would reflect the player's or coach's unwillingness to adjust to the game. Some would consider persistently excessive force sufficiently "violent" to fall under the definition of a flagrant foul.

Others would say that a foul is a foul: it's either INT or flagrant, and can't be called based on the game situation.