[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Ch1town

I recently heard Mr. Rush, Sr. & Mr. Clougherty discuss "take" situations.

According to those two extremely knowledgeable sources, the team behind is taking a foul in the end of game situation.

"Put your hand on 'em & it's a foul."

"You have to know TIME, SCORE & FOULS ."

"You have to know if a team is taking a foul... end of game situation I'm behind by 2 & you have the ball with less than 5 seconds is a take situation."

"You have to have your anttena up & be mentally ready."

Apparently the amount of contact that constitutes a foul does change from the beginning to the end of a game.

Originally Posted by btaylor64

If we know what the team's objective is (to foul) then any amount of contact should be deemed as such. There is no need to referee with purity here. They want a foul, so just give them one as soon as contact occurs.

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Why does your definition of foul change in this situation? If you call a foul for "any amount of contact", aren't you directly contradicting 4-27-1? Aren't you penalizing the offense by allowing the defense to accomplish what they want (stopping the clock), without doing what they need to do, by rule, to stop the clock?

Originally Posted by socalreff

Remember, he is a pro-am guy with that rule set mentality.
They don't even have an intentional foul in the book - if you are fouling a player with the ball.

The NFHS has made it clear that they do not desire that D1/NBA philosophy at the HS level.

2006-07 POINTS OF EMPHASIS

• Contact – Contact that is not considered a foul early in the game should not be considered a foul late in the game simply because a team "wants" to foul. Conversely, contact that is deemed intentional late in the game should likewise be called intentional early in the game.