View Single Post
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Wed Feb 15, 2006, 07:52pm
lmeadski lmeadski is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Michigan
Posts: 271
Quote:
Originally posted by Texas Aggie
In the Fed book this year, it says that fouling to stop the clock is "an acceptable coaching strategy." Which is sort of inconsistent with the idea of intentional foul -- and why I would like to see the term changed.

My idea for years has been 2 shots and the ball for any foul inside of 1 minute to play in the fourth quarter. I don't quite understand why the rules committee would say that committing a rules infraction is an "acceptable strategy."
It isn't inconsistent if the players have been coached properly. If the coach is yelling, "foul" we can assume they are behind. The defensive players should be aggressively going for steals. If they pick one clean, no foul. If they get all or part of their man, tweet. When someone says intentional foul I think of the dufus that shoves a player in the back, grabs a jersey, etc, on breakaways and away from the ball. These actons make it REAL clear his/her intentions were ONLY to foul.
__________________
All of us learn to write in the second grade. Most of us go on to greater things.
Reply With Quote