View Single Post
  #17 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 17, 2006, 11:22am
Dan_ref Dan_ref is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Just north of hell
Posts: 9,250
Send a message via AIM to Dan_ref
Here it is, word for word:

Quote:
4. Intentional Fouls
The committee continues to be concerned about how games end. While there has been some improvement in the application of the rule, there is still need for further understanding and enforcement. An intentional foul is a personal or technical foul that neutralizes an opponent's obvious advantageous position. Contact away from the ball or when not making a legitimate attempt to play the ball or player, specifically designed to stop or keep the clock from starting, shall be intentional. Intentional fouls may or may not be premeditated and are not based solely on the severity of the act. A foul also shall be ruled intentional if while playing the ball a player causes excessive contact with an opponent.

Fouling is an accepted coaching strategy late in the game. There is a right way and a wrong way to foul. Coaches must instruct their players in the proper technique for strategic fouling. "Going for the ball" is a common phrase heard, but intentional fouls should still be called on players who go for the ball if it is not done properly.

Additionally, in throw-in situations, fouling a player that is not involved in the play in any way (setting a screen, attempting to receive the in-bound pass, etc.) must be deemed intentional. Far too often, officials do not call fouls as intentional when the act clearly meets the criteria.
IMO they could have eliminated the entire last paragraph and been much clearer. But let's take a step back - what are they getting at? A few years ago the fed, in their infinite wisdom, declared that strategic fouls are NOT legal. If a coach or player yelled "foul 'em" near the end of the game that was intentional. Interpreters even told coaches to invent code words for "foul 'em", and the smart ones did. And btw the smart officials ignored this nonsense.

A year or 2 later the fed decided - on second thought - that strategic fouls ARE legal and a legitimate part of the game. But they had to be done right. Now they are twisting themselves into pretzels trying to distill down the notion of a correctly executed strategic fouls into as few words as possible.

The play the fed is talking about here is essentially when B1 wraps his arms around A1 and starts screaming "hey ref! ref!! Lookatme!!!" while coach B starts jumping up & down pointing at his player to make sure you see it before the throw-in is completed and the clock starts. IOW fouls meant to intentionally stop the clock or keep it from starting that are even obvious to the blind guy out in the hallway selling popcorn.

This of course differs from strategic fouls, which are NONobvious fouls meant to stop the clock or keep it from starting....cough cough...

It's a fine line, but that's why they pay us the big bucks.
Reply With Quote