Used and loved by millions

Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak quote

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak

CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com

MitStanfordHarvardAustralian Nationa UniversityNanyangOxford

technical foul

Grammar usage guide and real-world examples

USAGE SUMMARY

The phrase "technical foul" is correct and usable in written English.
It is typically used in the context of sports, particularly basketball, to describe a violation of the rules that does not involve physical contact between players. Example: "The referee called a technical foul on the coach for arguing with the officials."

✓ Grammatically correct

News & Media

Human-verified examples from authoritative sources

Exact Expressions

56 human-written examples

Technical foul.

Technical foul No. 1.

Another technical foul.

Pavlovic got a technical foul.

O'Neal received a technical foul.

Barnes received a technical foul.

He was given a technical foul.

"I don't know why technical foul".

Thomas was whistled for a technical foul.

Hollins slapped him for a technical foul.

Tinsley was assessed a technical foul.

Show more...

Expert writing Tips

Best practice

When reporting on sports, use "technical foul" to specifically denote non-contact infractions or violations by non-players. This adds precision to your reporting.

Common error

Avoid using "technical foul" when describing fouls involving physical contact. A personal foul is the correct term for such instances. Incorrect usage detracts from the accuracy of sports reporting.

Antonio Rotolo, PhD - Digital Humanist | Computational Linguist | CEO @Ludwig.guru

Antonio Rotolo, PhD

Digital Humanist | Computational Linguist | CEO @Ludwig.guru

Source & Trust

87%

Authority and reliability

4.6/5

Expert rating

Real-world application tested

Linguistic Context

The phrase "technical foul" functions as a noun, specifically a compound noun, designating a specific type of penalty in sports. As Ludwig AI confirms, it is grammatically sound and widely accepted.

Expression frequency: Very common

Frequent in

News & Media

100%

Less common in

Science

0%

Formal & Business

0%

Academia

0%

Ludwig's WRAP-UP

The phrase "technical foul" is a grammatically correct and commonly used term, primarily in sports reporting, to denote a non-physical infraction. As Ludwig AI indicates, the term is accurate and appropriate in relevant contexts. While alternatives like "flagrant foul" or "personal foul" exist, "technical foul" specifically describes non-contact violations or misconduct by non-players. Correct usage is key to maintaining clarity and accuracy in sports-related content.

FAQs

What exactly constitutes a "technical foul" in sports?

A "technical foul" is a penalty in sports, primarily basketball, for infractions that don't involve physical contact during play between players on the court. It can also be a foul by a non-player, such as a coach or team staff.

How does a "technical foul" differ from a personal foul?

A "technical foul" is assessed for non-contact violations or misconduct, while a personal foul involves illegal physical contact between opposing players during the game.

What are some common reasons for getting a "technical foul"?

Common reasons include arguing with the referee, using inappropriate language, excessive delay of game, or violating specific rules related to team conduct or equipment.

What are the consequences of receiving a "technical foul"?

Typically, the opposing team is awarded one or more free throws, and possession of the ball may be granted. Repeated technical fouls can lead to ejection from the game. Some leagues also impose fines.

ChatGPT power + Grammarly precisionChatGPT power + Grammarly precision
ChatGPT + Grammarly

Editing plus AI, all in one place.

Stop switching between tools. Your AI writing partner for everything—polishing proposals, crafting emails, finding the right tone.

Source & Trust

87%

Authority and reliability

4.6/5

Expert rating

Real-world application tested

Most frequent sentences: