|
And still confusion persists.
If everyone in the gym knows they are going to purposely (notice the use of the word purposely instead of intentionally) foul then the only differentiation between an intential foul and a non-intentional foul is a token swipe at the ball?
I don't know how many different times I'll need to say this, but I'm getting ready for my first year of officiating so obviously my views come without a wealth of experience.
I think we would all recognize a foul made with the primary intent to hurt/punish the opposing player as an intentional foul. We all would also recognize a run-of-the-mill foul as being just a standard foul. In between is a lot of gray area for me. I can't imagine it being as black and white as some have painted it and my initial reaction is that a number of factors come into play:
Severity/violence of the foul
Emotions within the game (is this likely to spark an altercation?)
Intimidation factor (was the foul made in such a way as to intimidate or bully the offensive player?)
Safety of the players (was the offensive player in a defenseless position or braced for the foul?)
Excessiveness of the contact (did the defender make the minimum or maximum contact to draw the foul?)
Until the strategy of committing fouls to prolong the game is regulated, this will remain a very gray area for officials. Does anyone have thoughts on my criteria?
|