Dan: instead of trying to be a smart ***, read again what we both wrote. I don't care what coaches say or what their instructions are. I'm interested in creating a rule set that, regardless of when or why fouls are committed, they are discouraged as a coaching strategy. It isn't strictly at the end of the game to stop the clock, but could also discourage the foul strategy that puts people on the line instead of allowing them, for example, a layup when the offensive player has clearly beaten the defender (assuming 10+ fouls).
That's why I said not "exactly", and I stand by that.
Quote:
|
If more of us called the intentional foul tighter and more often, I think the situation would change without a rule book change.
|
Fed doesn't want us to call it tighter because they specifically said that fouling to stop the clock is an acceptable strategy. Until they remove that language, its moot.
Quote:
|
I have seen the offensive player make a good play in avoiding the defender trying to foul him and the defender just reachinng and touching his shirt as he dribbles by.
|
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that specific play (shirt grab) listed as one that should be called an intentional foul? Or, are you speaking of the idea officials use that when they are trying to foul, we are going to give it to them so as not to risk having a physical retaliation, fight, etc.? If the latter, then it still goes back to that damn quote in the rulebook, which in my opinion is 100% wrong.