Elbow Swing

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by ballgame99

Had a play last night I was trying to get some clarification on and I don't have my rule book handy. We had a rebounder come down and start swinging elbows. No contact was made with any of them. My partner calls a technical for excessive elbows. I asked if there was contact made and his reply was that it didn't matter. I let him take the call and he got a bunch of crap for it.

After the game we were discussing it and I told him I thought it there was swinging and no contact that it was a violation, and if there was contact the penalty would depend on the severity of the contact. Plus I told him I thought it was an intentional foul rather than a technical. He was certain he had called it right and that if there WERE any contact it was flagrant and auto ejection.

This thread discusses the various degrees of contact and how they should be penalized but it doesn't really discuss if no contact is made. Am I thinking right that elbows with no contact is just a violation? Bonus points if you know the rules citation.

If there is excessive swinging with no contact...violation. However, just a few years ago, your partner would have been correct. It was a technical foul until sometime in the late 2000's.

[ballgame99]

Thanks for the follow up guys, yeah he was an old timer so that maybe explains it. And I normally do have my rule book in the bag and i went to grab it and I just had my manual. I took it out for reference after last season and never put it back. Thanks again.

[BillyMac]

2012-13 Points Of Emphasis

2. Contact above the shoulders. With a continued emphasis on reducing concussions and decreasing excessive contact situations the committee determined that more guidance is needed for penalizing contact above the shoulders.

a. A player shall not swing his/her arm(s) or elbow(s) even without contacting an opponent. Excessive swinging of the elbows occurs when arms and elbows are swung about while using the shoulders as pivots, and the speed of the extended arms and elbows is in excess of the rest of the body as it rotates on the hips or on the pivot foot. Currently it is a violation in Rule 9 Section 13 Article.

b. Examples of illegal contact above the shoulders and resulting penalties.
1. Contact with a stationary elbow may be incidental or a common foul.
2. An elbow in movement but not excessive should be an intentional foul.
3. A moving elbow that is excessive can be either an intentional foul or flagrant personal foul.

Originally Posted by ballgame99

I normally do have my rule book in the bag

An up to date rulebook wouldn't help if there was contact. It was a Point of Emphasis a few years ago and, as we all well know, they evaporate after one year. Poor rookies. Stupid NFHS.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by ballgame99

Thanks for the follow up guys, yeah he was an old timer so that maybe explains it. And I normally do have my rule book in the bag and i went to grab it and I just had my manual. I took it out for reference after last season and never put it back. Thanks again.

I am a older that an "old timer" and I can remember when the NFHS and NCAA rule that excessive swinging of the elbows without contact was just a violation and then the NFHS made it a TF and then the NFHS changed it back to the same as the NCAA rule.

MTD, Sr.

[egj13]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

An up to date rulebook wouldn't help if there was contact. It was a Point of Emphasis a few years ago and, as we all well know, they evaporate after one year. Poor rookies. Stupid NFHS.

This is exactly what happened the other night...although it was a rookie HC not partners. I call an IF for contact above the shoulders and the HC naturally questions it. I explain the rule and he says he's never seen it..."show me that in the book then" I go in at half and scour the book...nothing. Me and my partners all thought we had been dreaming! I'll have to start carrying a library or old rule books with me in the future.

[ballgame99]

So is that 12-13 POE still in effect then? Is it just an extended interpretation of the intentional foul rule?

[bob jenkins]

It's still in effect here. Your state might vary.