View Single Post
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Fri Nov 02, 2001, 07:13pm
Mark Padgett Mark Padgett is offline
certified Hot Mom tester
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: only in my own mind, such as it is
Posts: 12,918
To Camron - I totally agree that the intentional foul where a player is going for the ball but the contact was excessive should not be named an "intentional" foul. I also don't like the NBA terminology of "flagrant level 1" and "flagrant level 2". I don't think "water foul" is the answer either. Perhaps we could call it an "excessive contact foul" or something similar.

To Rut - good point. Guys - don't think that foul #3 would only be intentional on a grab if the intent was to stop play in an "endgame" situation. There is the possibility that an intentional grab could be just because the defender got beat and he's stopping a clear path to the basket at any point in the game. In either case, it's an intentional foul. I know this last one isn't specifically spelled out in NF rules like the "clear path" NBA foul, but it's intentional nonetheless.
__________________
Yom HaShoah
Reply With Quote