Elbow to the Nose
 

Last night, I had a FB game with schools I didn't even know had freshman teams. Middle of the 4th quarter, V down by roughly 30 points. Big V1 gets a defensive rebound and is being challenged by H1. V1 pulls the ball away, and swings his elbow prior to pivoting (he never actually pivoted because of what happened next).

H2 (a guard) comes in from the endline side and tries to get to the ball, but ends up with V1's elbow smashing into his nose. I think he was on the floor before he realized what had hit him.

V coach relaxed a bit when I started my explanation to him with, "By rule."

"By rule" the official can deem this a PC, an intentional personal, or a flagrant personal foul.
Which did you select?

He was swinging the elbow, so I went with an intentional personal. Not much room for PC on that, the way I understand the POE (or is it no longer valid?).

My understanding is Intentional Personal applies to negligent elbow swinging, and Flagrant Personal applies to purposeful and/or intentional and/or aggressive elbow swinging.

Not sure PC ever applies here.

From the POE, my understanding is that a PC would apply only if the elbow was moving with the rest of the body. If the elbow is moving faster than the body, it's intentional at a minimum.

True. I took "swings his elbows" to mean faster than the body... maybe a bad assumption on my part.

After reading the OP, I figured intentional, but there are guys I talk to who would consider Flagrant. Maybe this is just me (?) but for any elbow to go flagrant, I need to see some sort of intent from the elbower. I don't think it's good practice to look at the damage done and factor that in to intentional vs flagrant. From PC to intentional? Yes, I think that the result of that play can be used to upgrade. But if you have a 240-lb, 6-5 monster in there that elbows a guard on a swing or pivot in which he clearly didn't know the guard was there? Even if the result looks or seems bad, I'm probably staying at intentional.

Door Number One, Door Number Two, Or Door Number Three ???
 

https://sp.yimg.com/ib/th?id=HN.6080...0&pid=15.1&P=0

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.

4-19-4: A flagrant foul may be a personal or technical foul of a violent or
savage nature, or a technical noncontact foul which displays unacceptable
conduct. It may or may not be intentional. If personal, it involves, but is not
limited to violent contact such as: striking, kicking and kneeing. If technical, it
involves dead-ball contact or noncontact at any time which is extreme or
persistent, vulgar or abusive conduct. Fighting is a flagrant act.
__________________

Your assumption was accurate.

Ah I was speaking about contact with the elbow above the shoulders in general. In a swinging the elbow context, I agree.

Bottom line is....excellent call.

And we just talked about this in another thread a few days ago and for the most part I think we all agreed about what to do with contacting elbows. So if the forum discussion was in the back of your mind, then we've done the game a service.

From your description, that is the same call I would have made. I'm just curious about your "by rule" statement to the coach.
Did you follow it up with,"... if the arms/elbows are moving faster than the body during pivoting, it's an intentional foul?"

If moving as the same speed as the body still intentional by the POE unless your state says otherwise

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.

That's a fair question, and I likely should have done that.

I believe it is and have called it that way but have some questions about it.

If the elbows are moving in excess of the speed of the rest of the body it is called EXCESSIVE swinging of arms and elbows. 4-24-8. In 9-13-3, the swinging elbow violation rule, it says "action of the arms and elbows resulting from total body movement as in pivoting OR movement of the ball by feinting with it shall not be considered EXCESSIVE."--- The elbows are moving in those actions but by rule we are not to deem them EXCESSIVE.

b2. An elbow in movement but not excessive should be an intentional foul. 9-13-3, quoted above, explains movement and tells you what is not excessive. I pivot normally holding ball and catch you in head or fake/feint with ball and my elbow catches you.-- Elbow moves--should be Intentional foul. I admit i'm not sure why it says SHOULD be as opposed to SHALL.


b3. moving elbow that is excessive (elbows moving at speed in excess of rest of body) can be intentional or flagrant.

For me, if the elbow is moving and contact is made above shoulders it is intentional foul, at least. That is consistent with concussion stuff. player responsible for his own elbows.

The opening sentence of section A of the POE says "A player shall not swing his arms or elbows even without making contact." That's not what 4-24-8 or 9-13 says. they both say "Excessively." Not sure why that sentence is there. I also dont like the fact that these head contact plays havnt made it into the rule books.

Anyway, if anyone sees it differently let me know. maybe im missing it...thx