I may have been interpreting what I was told wrong. This is a very well though out explanation and I would agree with this interpretation.

Since you skipped some of this thread...I may be inclined to think you skippped some of the Washington State Rules Clinic on this very topic.

I am not saying I agree with a "pivoting elbow" being stationary(even though I have only called a PC foul on this type of play many times, so why change and make this call an automatic intentional foul?) ...but that is exactly what our on-line rules clinic stated.

...if you would like to bet me a soda or perhaps a car washing...I would be glad to oblige.;)

...you may agree with what rockyroad is saying...but, it is not what his own state put out in an on-line rules clinic.

I have the hard copy printed out in black and white...if you would like me to quote it again. (from a previous thread)

What the heck...I went and dug it out...here is the EXACT wording from Slide 28 of 57...

"CONTACT ABOVE THE SHOULDERS

a. A player shall not swing his/her arm(s) or elbow(s) even without contacting an opponent.
b. Examples of illegal contact above the shoulders and resulting penalties:

1. Contact with a stationary elbow may be incidental or a common foul.

An elbow is stationary when a player pivots but does not swing the elbows (when the elbow moves with the hip)"

Slide #28 from the WOA...Washington Officials Association

Going to go with what my State Association told me today.

My example: If player chins the ball and pivots and the elbows are not moving faster than the shoulders or torso, and contact happens above the shoulders.

Interpretation: Looking at rule 9-13.....a moving elbow would be faster than the body so the elbow you described would not be defined as excessive.....contact with this elbow is not automatically a foul.

So...by that interp, chin and pivot with elbows not faster than body = elbows not moving = PC or incidental.

Elbows moving faster than body = intentional or flagrant

...sounds like your state is right in line with ours...thanks for checking.

Bottom line is this is one of the worst, most poorly written rule we have had in a long time.

And that slide is exactly why our Board directed our Assignor to contact the WIAA and the WOA for clarification, and we were told exactly what I posted before...and I will even let you keep your beverage. You can contact them and ask for clarification yourself if you don't believe me...feel free. It's a free call.

This is what we just received on this subject from NCAAW
 

Play 1: Player A2 has her elbows extended with her hands held near her chest (Rule 4-36.6.b) and her elbows are stationary (not moving) when she sets an illegal screen. Defender B1 hits her head on A1’s stationary elbow as she gets caught on the illegal screen. A foul is charged to A2 for her illegal screen. Can this foul be reviewed to see if the elbow contact was above or below the shoulders? What is the penalty for this foul?

Ruling 1: This foul can NOT be reviewed because the elbow contact above the shoulders was not a result of a moving/swinging elbow. This is a team control foul and the penalty is no free throws with the ball being awarded to the offended team at a spot nearest to where the foul occurred. The intent of penalizing illegal elbow contact with a flagrant 1 personal foul and the review of such contact has always been for a moving/swinging elbow (Rule 4-29.2.c.6) and not for a player who runs into a stationary elbow.

Comment: We must know the intent of the rule to be able to understand why it is the rule and how to enforce it properly. The intent of assessing a flagrant 1 personal foul for illegal elbow contact above the shoulders of an opponent was to penalize players who swing their elbows and make illegal contact above the shoulders of an opponet that was not severe enough to be considered a flagrant 2 personal foul. This rule was intended to more severly penalize this type of illegal contact because a moving/swinging elbow contacting the head of an opponent posed a danger to the player being hit by it. Because of the harsher penalty, players are discouraged from swinging the elbow near an opponent’s head. This is a very different play than a player running into an elbow that is not moving. Not all fouls that involve elbow contact above the shoulders are flagrant 1 personal fouls. The stationary elbow of an illegal screener is a good example of a foul that involves contact with an elbow that is not moving and thus is a team control foul.

I'm not saying it isn't "moving" in the literal definition of the word but that the direction given on what should be called includes a common foul when it is part of a pivot. Reconcile that how you want whether you want to stretch the definition of moving or simply accepting that moving was a poor choice of words. Either way, you an I are calling the same thing.

The rules interpreter here said that a piviot is a moving elbow and to call an intentional foul. Yours said it can be a common foul. The way I see it is that it really doesn't matter which way as along as everyone calls it the same in their own area.

I just quoted the WOA slide that says the pivoting player's elbow is stationary.

If Todd S. disagrees with this statement...then maybe he should put out a directive to all associations across the state saying his group should not have worded slide #28 in this manner. (afterall, you said it was dumb):p

Rocky...you said yourself that you may call a common foul on a pivot with contact above the shoulders.

Many here would disagree with you, with their interp. of the POE, and say you MUST call an int. foul when contact is above the shoulders.

I believe that is the big difference here...some say you MAY call an int. foul on a pivot, and some say you MUST call an int. foul on a pivot.

I'm with the former...as I believe you are.

...so keep your bucket of suds, I'll wash my own car.;)

Well if that's all this whole debate comes down to - the words "may" and "must" - then we are on the same page...the clarification we got was that a pivoting player's elbow is moving, though.

NCHSAA instruction on this subject:

Contact with a stationary elbow - common foul
Contact with a moving elbow - intentional foul
Excessive contact with moving elbow - intentional or flagrant

Pretty simple, certainly not worthy of 7 pages of discussion. :)

The discussion was over the definition of "stationary" in this context, and the different interpretations from different states.

If you pivot, your elbow moves, along with everything else. Your are responsible for where it goes, and if it hits somebody in the head the committee wants it to be at least an intentional foul.

Now everybody do what you think is best.