Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust
It does remove the implication that an intentional foul can only be called of the act was intentional vs. a foul for excessive contact.
|
True, and like it was mentioned in the article, there are certain elbow fouls that are intentional fouls but had nothing to do with "intent." Really, the intentional foul as far as fitting the namesake was pertinent mostly during fast breaks and few other situations. It's a good proposal for fans, coaches, and players.
I'm curious if this makes it to the "rule changes" section or if it would be an editorial change and if it's the later, why would this have to go through the rules committee?