M&M, the NCAA POI is something I totally agree with. If the foul is away from the ball in this situation, I agree that should be intentional. What I am saying, and i think others are saying is to prevent the mugging on the ball, call the common foul if there is contact and an attempt to play the ball. No one has siad they are going to make something up. What people have said is they will call the "light" contact in this situation. On our board we have a member of the NFHS rules commitee and he asked us this at our interpretation meeting. How many times have you seen a kid swipe at the ball handler, barely hit him, and then look at you when the call is not made, as if to say I fouled him, and then go back and really whack someone drawing the intentional. According to Jack, citing discussions during NFHS rules committee meetings, that happens a lot. According to Jack, they were not suggesting that every foul in this situation be a common foul nor should every one be an intentional foul. They agreed that awarding free throws or the ball out of bounds because of common fouls being called, even when the coach is yelling for it, was not rewarding the fouling team. Their position was hard fouls, grabbing/bearhugging fouls, fouls off the ball, were being called common fouls instaed of intentional fouls. As you stated, they also believed that there are proper ways to foul without committing an intentional foul. Fouling down the stretch is a part of the game. It is our job to make sure that the rules are applied properly. The rules clearly state that all contact is not a foul. In my opinion, and according to Jack at our meeting, calling a foul when an attempt to play the ball is made should be a common foul unless the contact is overly severe or excessive in these situations. A mere swipe without contact is not a foul. A swipe with contact (even if slight) in this situation, to me anyway, should almost always (99% of the time) be called a foul.
|