Disclaimer: For IAABO eyes only. Below is not a NFHS interpretation, it's only an IAABO International interpretation which obviously doesn't mean a hill of beans to most members of this Forum.
https://storage.googleapis.com/refqu...kNzH222P4Q.mp4
IAABO International Play Commentary:
Correct Answer: This is correctly ruled a Personal Foul.
White #1 is on a breakaway and about to attempt a lay-up when contact occurs with the defender in red jersey (and illegal black undershirt) from behind, causing the shooter to go to the floor.
Intentional and Flagrant Fouls are a Point of Emphasis for the 2020-21 Season. The NFHS Rules Committee is concerned with the understanding of these rules and proper enforcement. A foul should be ruled an Intentional Foul when a player, while playing the ball, causes excessive contact.
In this play, it appears the feet of both the offensive and defensive players get tangled as the shooter is preparing for his lay-up attempt. This accidental contact causes the shooter to go to the floor and is properly ruled a common foul.
If the defender had caused excessive contact on the shooter, which forcefully took the shooter to the floor, the contact should be ruled to be an intentional personal foul.
68.6% of respondents that viewed this clip viewed this contact as a common foul, 28.4% saw the contact as intentional. Regardless of your viewpoint on this play, all officials need to be willing to rule intentional fouls when excessive contact occurs.
The NFHS Rules Committee does not consider it a basketball play when airborne shooters are taken forcefully to the floor. (Casebook 4.19.3 Situation B) When that occurs, officials need to assess an intentional personal foul.
4.19.3 Situation B: A1 drives to the basket with B1 in pursuit. As A1 begins the act of shooting, B1 gets a hand on the ball from behind and the subsequent contact takes A1 forcefully to the floor and out of bounds. Ruling: An intentional foul shall be charged when the contact is judged to be excessive, even though the opponent is playing the ball. (4-11; 4-19-3d)
My added note: 4-19-2: A
common foul is a personal foul which is neither flagrant nor intentional
nor committed against a player trying or tapping for a field goal nor a part of a double, simultaneous or multiple foul.
Here is the breakdown of the IAABO members that commented on the video: This is correctly ruled a Personal Foul 69% (including me); This should have been ruled an Intentional Foul 28%; The defensive player loses his footing and this should have been ruled incidental 3%.
Another added note from me: Even if it was ruled an
intentional foul, it would still be a
personal foul, so the only wrong answer would be incidental contact.