Mark D, I read it quoted here, I think by our old correspondent Todd Van but I wouldn't swear by it.
And it sounds to me like the coach is confused between flagrant and intentional fouls. I can't swear to the original reason for the intentional foul rule, but differentiating between flagrant and intentional fouls distinguishes the malicious foul with intent (or potential) to injure from the merely intentional noninjurious foul. Here there was intent to foul but nothing malicious, so his player remains in the game
maybe Dave would tell him that if he wants a really bad call, he'll be happy to change it to flagrant!