Was watching this match between Archer and Zielinski, and at 1:34:32 Zielinski commits an "unsportsmanlike foul" according to the commentator. There was some checking by ref, he got on the phone, and determined it was just an intentional foul. But commentator said it should be -18 points (presumably referring to the points lost in the normal 3 fouls + penalty sequence). Curious about the rule here. In the WPA rules, it says "for unsportsmanlike conduct, the referee will choose a penalty depending on the nature of the offense." Under "unsportsmanlike conduct" it says "the penalty for unsportsmanlike conduct is the same as for a serious foul, but the referee may impose a penalty depending on his judgement of the conduct."
- Would "serious foul" here mean -15 points?
- Does this also get the same treatment as the normal three-foul penalty, with a required re-rack? Is that up to referee? Is it even an option?
- Sounds like the number of points up to ref, could it be anything?
Curious if there are any sort of standards or normally accepted outcomes for unsportsmanlike conduct? The rule book makes it seem pretty open-ended.
- Would "serious foul" here mean -15 points?
- Does this also get the same treatment as the normal three-foul penalty, with a required re-rack? Is that up to referee? Is it even an option?
- Sounds like the number of points up to ref, could it be anything?
Curious if there are any sort of standards or normally accepted outcomes for unsportsmanlike conduct? The rule book makes it seem pretty open-ended.
