Originally Posted by Bartelby
But like all words it has a range of meaning, but for a foot fault to be called by an umpire it must be obvious so ... why would flagrant just mean obvious?
I think flagrant is meant as a stronger form of obvious in this situation, to reflect the relatively poor vantage point that the receiver has to make the call relative to the vantage point an official or umpire would have.
Under your apparent interpretation, why would there be a rule that effectively says "Someone can clearly and obviously break this rule, and not be able to be legitimately be called on it, as long as they didn't really mean to do it." ?
Are there any rules in any sports that exist that say something like this? It makes no sense.