Originally Posted by crosscountry55 (Post 1003580)

I'll issue a polite dissent here. Have none of us ever called a common foul away from the ball against a player not involved in a play? An offensive player might be standing in the post weakside, unengaged, without much going on....yet. But a defender, anticipating a need to improve his future rebounding position, might displace him to make space. Are we saying that's an intentional foul because it occurred away from the ball against a player not involved in the play? Of course we don't.

I understand the intent of the quoted POE, and from the description in the OP, it sounds like the intent of the player who got fouled was expressly to have nothing to do with any intent to play or score. And why not if you want all the attention on your team's best free throw shooter? So if that's the case, good IF call.

My point is that there are some (coaches and officials) who believe that in a late game situation such as in the OP, only the ball handler can be fouled commonly. False! So if a coach is strategizing to foul a weaker FT shooter, I'm going common foul if the fouled player has even so much as a sniff of engagement in the play.

What I remind myself during these situations is that A) some good coaches will try to foul before a throw-in ends in order to maximize saved time, and B) outside of throw-ins, to at least have an awareness of off-ball defenders in case they want to foul a weaker FT shooter.

Originally Posted by RefsNCoaches (Post 1003631)

By written rule, sounds as if it was handled by the book.

With that said, I've seen plenty of these at end of game that probably fall right within the crosshairs of the written rule at the end of games but don't get called as intentional. The defense who is trailing is fouling with the sole purpose of stopping the clock...it's an unwritten understanding but by written rule, it doesn't seem to get called as such because of the aforementioned.

Same time/place/score - If a non ball handler were cutting and the defense held them on the cut, would we call it intentional...probably not but that would be the way around the intentional call.

I just don't see it called intentional at the end of games when it's clear they are trying to extend the game for themselves.

Originally Posted by deecee (Post 1003639)

A cutter being held to prevent a cut is usually a basketball play and one where the defender is caught off guard and/or out of position. A player away from the ball just standing there getting fouled at the end of regulation is an intentional foul. We all know in take-foul situations the offense is NOT running anything except get the ball to the best FT shooter and run the clock.

Originally Posted by RefsNCoaches (Post 1003631)

By written rule, sounds as if it was handled by the book.

With that said, I've seen plenty of these at end of game that probably fall right within the crosshairs of the written rule at the end of games but don't get called as intentional. The defense who is trailing is fouling with the sole purpose of stopping the clock...it's an unwritten understanding but by written rule, it doesn't seem to get called as such because of the aforementioned.

Same time/place/score - If a non ball handler were cutting and the defense held them on the cut, would we call it intentional...probably not but that would be the way around the intentional call.

I just don't see it called intentional at the end of games when it's clear they are trying to extend the game for themselves.

Originally Posted by Adam (Post 1003656)

The expectation is that if you're giving a foul to stop the clock, you need to be fouling the player with the ball. Trying to circumvent that is going to, or should, draw an intentional call from the officials.

Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 1003493)

Sounds like the very definition of an intentional foul in NFHS rules.

Originally Posted by Old Man Ref (Post 1003817)

I refereed a game once where the home team was trying to score 100 points against an out-manned team. Single A level ball. Home team is pressing up 60 points with under a minute to go and stuck on 98 pts. The home team coach yells "foul him, foul him." The home player fouled the dribbler and I called an intentional foul. Poor sportsmanship by the home coach but in hindsight, I should not have called the intentional foul.

Originally Posted by Old Man Ref (Post 1003817)

... coach yells "foul him, foul him."

Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 1003827)

Back in the ancient days, that was pretty much an automatic intentional foul. In my early days of coaching middle school basketball, back in the late 1970's, I was told by a fellow teacher who also officiated our home games to come up with a code word. From that point on, the code word was, "Steal the ball". I used it for over twenty-five years, even after the NFHS changed to rule to allow for strategic fouling at the end of the game.

Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 1003827)

Back in the ancient days, that was pretty much an automatic intentional foul. In my early days of coaching middle school basketball, back in the late 1970's, I was told by a fellow teacher who also officiated our home games to come up with a code word. From that point on, the code word was, "Steal the ball". I used it for over twenty-five years, even after the NFHS changed to rule to allow for strategic fouling at the end of the game.

Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 1003827)

Back in the ancient days, that was pretty much an automatic intentional foul. In my early days of coaching middle school basketball, back in the late 1970's, I was told by a fellow teacher who also officiated our home games to come up with a code word. From that point on, the code word was, "Steal the ball". I used it for over twenty-five years, even after the NFHS changed to rule to allow for strategic fouling at the end of the game.

Originally Posted by crosscountry55 (Post 1003855)

As if we don't know what's happening.