Disqualification

[The Roamin' Umpire]

Originally posted by wolfpup27
Again, I guess I am looking at "an extended arm and locked" elbow as the reasoning behind the difference between a slap to the helmet (9-5) and adding a flagrancy violation on top. This official determined that because it met this criteria that it constituted flagrancy and DQ. Where is this definition is all that I am asking? If it does not exist, then does it not stand to reason that this is a misapplication of a rule that does not exist?

There is no such definition. It sounds like the official has his own personal guideline, as we all do, for what constitutes "flagrant," and the description you give is part of his guideline. It is not a misapplication of a rule - this is entirely the official's judgement as to what is "flagrant."