End of game part 2

[johnny d]

How exactly does one determine that a foul isn't an intentional foul after an official signals the foul as such?

[Rich]

It's pretty hard to undo this train wreck after the fact.

Of course if the other official didn't signal an INT at the spot, it would be *easy* to walk that back / ignore that.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by johnny d

How exactly does one determine that a foul isn't an intentional foul after an official signals the foul as such?

Originally Posted by Rich

It's pretty hard to undo this train wreck after the fact.

Of course if the other official didn't signal an INT at the spot, it would be *easy* to walk that back / ignore that.

Maybe it isn't so hard....why was it intentional? Excessive contact? Or just neutralizing an obvious advantage?

If the latter there was no advantage to be neutralized since the ball was dead. I could see retracting that intentional since it no longer meets the definition of intentional. If it was excessive contact, however, that doesn't change because the ball was dead...charge it.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Maybe it isn't so hard....why was it intentional? Excessive contact? Or just neutralizing an obvious advantage?

If the latter there was no advantage to be neutralized since the ball was dead. I could see retracting that intentional since it no longer meets the definition of intentional. If it was excessive contact, however, that doesn't change because the ball was dead...charge it.

yep

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Maybe it isn't so hard....why was it intentional? Excessive contact? Or just neutralizing an obvious advantage?

If the latter there was no advantage to be neutralized since the ball was dead. I could see retracting that intentional since it no longer meets the definition of intentional. If it was excessive contact, however, that doesn't change because the ball was dead...charge it.

This is an excellent point and wisely rules-based. But, say you walk back from the signal. How do you sum this up in one sentence or less to the incredulous coach who saw said signal?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

This is an excellent point and wisely rules-based. But, say you walk back from the signal. How do you sum this up in one sentence or less to the incredulous coach who saw said signal?

Good question....very carefully and even so it will probably not be well received.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

This is an excellent point and wisely rules-based. But, say you walk back from the signal. How do you sum this up in one sentence or less to the incredulous coach who saw said signal?

"Coach, intentional foul is a judgment call, and my judgment was based on the fact that I thought the ball was live, which I have just learned is not true."

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by just another ref

"Coach, intentional foul is a judgment call, and my judgment was based on the fact that I thought the ball was live, which I have just learned is not true."

Coach: "So if you thought it was an intentional foul live, wouldn't that be a technical or flagrant foul with a dead ball?"

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by OKREF

Coach: "So if you thought it was an intentional foul live, wouldn't that be a technical or flagrant foul with a dead ball?"

"No"

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by johnny d

How exactly does one determine that a foul isn't an intentional foul after an official signals the foul as such?

Go to the guy that made the call and give him additional information. "Look, timeout was called and the ball was already dead. What have you got?"

Hopefully he'll say "Nothing, time out."

[Rich]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Go to the guy that made the call and give him additional information. "Look, timeout was called and the ball was already dead. What have you got?"

Hopefully he'll say "Nothing, time out."

Oh, right, you don't think a signal actually means anything.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Rich

Oh, right, you don't think a signal actually means anything.

Signal is a signal. Show me something that says a signal is irreversible.