Quote:
|
I'll start with this one. Let's eliminate the term "intentional foul" and replace it with a "flagrant level one". The penalty would remain the same. We all know there are many times we call an intentional for excessive contact when there may not have been intent. I don't think there's anything wrong with making this call, but the terminology is confusing. We should go to the NBA rule of having level one and level two flagrants, with level two including ejection. It really wouldn't be a "rule" change, just a "terminology" change.
|
I think this is nuts. There are situations where "intentional fouls" are not flagrant and should not be labeled as such.
I don't necessarily think that NBA rules, and the way officials interpret and call them is something I want high school athletics and/or officials at this level to aspire to.
IMO, I honestly believe the "terminology" change would create more problems than it would help, although I agree that many incorrectly call the intentional foul. PC's can and should be called for excessive contact when there may not have been intent. We should all strive to make the correct call instead of making terminology changes to cover poor judgement, rules knowledge, and mechanics.