Although no one can state what the entire intent of the NF rules committee was when they instituted the intentional foul change to include excessive contact even when playing the ball, many of us started using it in much the same way the NBA has a "flagrant level 1" and a "flagrant level 2", with the level 2 including ejection. That is - the intentional is used when the foul went beyond a common foul, but did not warrant ejection. I believe that when a player excessively swings elbows, makes contact beyond the level of a common foul (in which case it would be player control) but not enough to warrant an ejection, you are justified in calling it an intentional foul and you treat it just like any other intentional foul call, which means you shoot the free throws and give possession to the other team. One other thought - if the elbows miss but you felt the offensive player was trying to intimidate the defender, you should call the T regardless of the severity or "excessiveness" of the swinging. This would be a T for unsportsmanlike conduct.
In my post above, I give some tips for how to determine if the swinging is excessive, using the model of "what would you have called if contact had been made?" You can use the same method for determining if a player was attempting a legitimate shot when an airball results and that player is first to touch. Think of it this way - if that player had been contacted when releasing the ball, would you have called a shooting foul? If so, it was a try. If you would have called it "on the ground", it wasn't - and you should call a travel. Of course, there's always the situation where the contact caused the ball to miss on a try, but that's a whole different can of worms
[This message has been edited by Mark Padgett (edited October 22, 1999).]