Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells
I disagree. "Which neutralizes an opponent's obvious advantage." I'm not commenting on the play itself, but the kind of path they have to the basket is absolutely relevant to calling an intentional foul.
|
My point is that there is nothing in the rule that says we call a clear path to the basket any different than if they are under the basket. If a defender has no intention on defending the ball or causes excessive contract I agree. But not just fouling someone that has a clear lane is not the criteria in the rule. I also would not say this is an "obvious advantage" when there is a foul. And if that is the case any player that tries to block a shot and fouls a player should be an intentional foul (and does not fit any of the criteria of the rule).
And in the situation which I think this question was asked (Arizona-UConn game early in that game) that was not an intentional foul and the ball handler had a clear lane to the basket.
Peace