[Adam]

Okay, just to clarify some things. I agree this particular play is (at least) a personal foul on A2. That's an easy call, IMO. I can't tell from the angle, however, if A2 raised her arms into B1. It sure looks like it's possible, and if she did that on a blind screen, the severity of the contact absolutely makes an intentional foul valid by rule. It's a judgment call.

Game management comes into play in determining whether this play should be intentional or not, IMO. The term "game management" is being used here, and I've mocked it to an extent but also said it's a real thing. I should explain. You absolutely cannot determine how GM should come into play with just this one play; you need to see the whole game, probably from the court with the referees' perspectives.

If A2 has been getting rough, or anyone for that matter, a righteous intentional foul might be a good thing to settle things down. If this is the first sign of trouble, a standard personal foul would probably suffice.

Again, remember, by rule, an intentional foul can be called if the contact is severe enough; even if it doesn't match the other requirements. Think of a shooter going up for a shot and getting clobbered and run over by B1 trying to block the shot. If we're going to protect an airborne shooter expecting to get challenged, why won't we protect a defender on an illegal blind screen?

To claim it's bad GM to call this intentional without seeing the rest of the game is just, well, um, well.... I disagree.