Quote:
Originally posted by eroe39
Mark, it's hard for me to reply without seeing the play, but obviously in a 2 point game with 10 seconds left you want to try to stay away from an intentional foul unless it is obvious that the foul was way too rough. A bear hug does not seem to me a foul that is excessive unless it is on a break away to stop a layup. A foul to me that is excessive is if a player is pushed to the floor or hacked in the face or undercut on a break away layup. A bear hug does not hurt a player fouled but is simply a way the defense tries to bring attention to the official that he wants a foul call. Again, I would have to see the play though so you might of been right to make the intentional foul call. As far as the way your partner handled the situation he should of obviously waited until you two were alone to talk about the play and should not of made the comment that you decided the game.
|
According to the NFHS rulebook, page 30, "An intentional foul is a personal or technical foiul designed to stop or keep the clock from starting, to neutralize an opponent's obvious advantageous position, contact away from the ball when not playing the ball. It may or may not be premeditated and is NOT based on the severity of the act." (emphasis added by me)
From the NFHS Simplified and Illustrated (last year's edition), Page 9, "Acts that MUST be deemed intentional may include: 1) grabbing a player from behind; 2) wrapping the arms around a player; 3)grabbing a player away from the ball; 4) grabbing or shoving a player from behind when an easy basket may be scored;..." (no more relevant to this discussion, and emphasis on MUST added by me)
Reading these two items, it would appear that the bear hug, whether or not excessive, is definitely defined by the rules as intentional. I have found in the games that I have done, there is a very strong apprehension about referees calling intentional fouls. They never seem to want to do it, and even when I have had situations during the game (most occur later in the game, but some do occur throughout) that warrant it according to the rules, most of the time they don't call it, or if I ask my partner, they say "that wasn't intentional".
I do understand the concept of calling the game fairly throughout. That is important.
But I don't understand why many refs, even though the rules say one thing, they choose to ignore it. They seem to feel that the late game fouling to stop the clock, which is specifically defined in the rules as not allowed (not the late game part, but the fouling to stop the clock), is a part of the game and should be allowed. It seems to me that this isn't really a judgement call, but more of a "I don't like that rule, so I'm not going to enforce or call it." This doesn't seem like something that is supposed to be our purvue - we make judgements about plays, according to the rules, and make our calls based on that (and a little common sense... but common sense shoulnd't override a hard and fast rule) - you can't play a game without rules.
I'm expecting a firestorm after this one, because I have always been a by-the-book ref. Blast shield up!
