Controversial call at end of OHSAA State Final

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The NFHS had a POE on intentional fouls a couple of years ago. A foul away from the ball against a player not involved in the play was one criterion listed.

2012-13 POINTS OF EMPHASIS

Intentional Fouls. The committee is concerned about the lack of enforcement for intentional fouls during any part of the game but especially at the end of a game. The intentional foul rule has devolved into misapplication and personal interpretations. An intentional foul is a personal or technical foul that neutralizes an opponent’s obvious advantageous position. Contact away from the ball or when not making a legitimate attempt to play the ball, specifically designed to stop or keep the clock from starting, shall be intentional. Intentional fouls may or may not be premeditated and are not based solely on the severity of the act. A foul also shall be ruled intentional if while playing the ball a player causes excessive contact with an opponent.

a. Anytime during the game. Acts that neutralize an opponent’s obvious advantageous position and must be deemed intentional include:
1. Excessive contact on any player attempting a try
2. Grabbing or shoving a player from behind when an easy basket may be scored
3. Grabbing and holding a player from behind or away from the ball
These are “non-basketball acts” and must be considered intentional fouls

b. Game awareness. The probability of fouling late in the game is an accepted coaching strategy and is utilized by many coaches in some form. Officials must have the courage to enforce the intentional foul rule properly.

2013-14 POINTS OF EMPHASIS

Intentional Foul - An intentional foul is a personal or technical foul that may or may not be premeditated and is not based solely on the severity of the act. It is contact that:
- Neutralizes an opponent’s obvious advantageous position.
- Contact on an opponent who is clearly not in the play.
- May be excessive contact.
- Contact that is not necessarily premeditated or based solely on the severity of the act.
This type of foul may be strategic to stop the clock or create a situation that may be tactically done for the team taking action. This foul may be innocent in severity, but without any playing of the ball, it becomes an intentional act such as a player wrapping their arms around an opponent. The act may be excessive in its intensity and force of the action. These actions are all intentional fouls and are to be called as such.

[BryanV21]

What else should the official have done? Sounds like there's no disagreement that it was a foul, just with the "intentional" part of it. However, NFHS clearly tells us that a foul like this is indeed "intentional".

No controversy at all. Just a coach and some fans that don't know the rules or are too upset about the loss to acknowledge them.

[ODog]

39-38 in the boys Division I final?!

Sounds like Ohio needs a shot clock.

[jamesshank]

Originally Posted by ODog

39-38 in the boys Division I final?!

Sounds like Ohio needs a shot clock.

Yep, but of course these games are anomalies according to good on another thread

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[jamesshank]

Originally Posted by jamesshank

Yep, but of course these games are anomalies according to good on another thread

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

Others, not good...Sorry

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by ODog

39-38 in the boys Division I final?!

Sounds like Ohio needs a shot clock.

Or a better basketball!!!

Peace

[deecee]

To the earlier reply about "explaining" to a coach about take-foul scenarios: This is not the time for a rules clinic. It's ok to explain a ruling after the fact but not before. It's also imperative when you know a team MAY be fouling to get the FIRST foul. Some coaches will be asses no matter the outcome.

I had a game where the coach pretty much told me what they were about to do. At the first sign of contact I blew my whistle which came just a fraction of a second before a second defender stole the ball (which if the coach didn't tell me what he was doing and the primary defender had been .5 seconds later it would have been a no call and steal). The coach "questioned" the call 30 feet away, and I responded with a T (not like he was a saint all game either). If he didn't tell me what he did I may not have T'd him for his behavior, but the fact that he did and then acted that way is the behavior that, I think, as officials we don't do a good enough job of addressing.

Originally Posted by deecee

To the earlier reply about "explaining" to a coach about take-foul scenarios: This is not the time for a rules clinic. It's ok to explain a ruling after the fact but not before. It's also imperative when you know a team MAY be fouling to get the FIRST foul. Some coaches will be asses no matter the outcome.

I had a game where the coach pretty much told me what they were about to do. At the first sign of contact I blew my whistle which came just a fraction of a second before a second defender stole the ball (which if the coach didn't tell me what he was doing and the primary defender had been .5 seconds later it would have been a no call and steal). The coach "questioned" the call 30 feet away, and I responded with a T (not like he was a saint all game either). If he didn't tell me what he did I may not have T'd him for his behavior, but the fact that he did and then acted that way is the behavior that, I think, as officials we don't do a good enough job of addressing.

I had an intentional fouling situation this past weekend. 7th grade boys I think, a player (A1) ran over to me after a timeout and said "Mr. Ref we are going to try and foul B55 on the other team after we score". I replied "Ok, make sure he has the ball and you go for the ball". He said nothing, but ran to his place. Team A scored, Team B inbounded the ball and a guard dribbled up the floor. Sure enough, a Team A player (A3) was trying to hug B55 on his way up the floor. Neither my partner or I called it. Within a few seconds A2 fouled the Team B dribbler. I called it, we set up for FT's and I went directly to the coach. He was already looking expectantly at me and said "we can't foul #55?" I replied "You can, but it would considered an Intentional foul. He has to have the ball or be involved in play somehow, not just running up the court. High schools rules are different from NBA -- you can't Hack-a-Shaq here". The coach gave a dejected sigh but nodded. We kept playing and B55 got the ball through normal play and they fouled him. But Team A still lost.

Not really sure what I could have done better. Should I have immediately gone and talked to the A coach after his player told me their plan? Should I have said nothing and just called an INT when they tried hugging B55? What do you guys think?

[deecee]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Not really sure what I could have done better. Should I have immediately gone and talked to the A coach after his player told me their plan? Should I have said nothing and just called an INT when they tried hugging B55? What do you guys think?

It's 7th grade travel ball, I would have shouted at the coach to make an attempt "on the ball" and that we don't play using NBA rules. Then I would have ignored the contact unless it HAD to be called an INT, and during the FT's told him what you said. But I wouldn't have held the game up to go and talk to him before.

It's 7th grade ball. In varsity or higher, INT all the way.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by AremRed

I had an intentional fouling situation this past weekend. 7th grade boys I think, a player (A1) ran over to me after a timeout and said "Mr. Ref we are going to try and foul B55 on the other team after we score". I replied "Ok, make sure he has the ball and you go for the ball". He said nothing, but ran to his place. Team A scored, Team B inbounded the ball and a guard dribbled up the floor. Sure enough, a Team A player (A3) was trying to hug B55 on his way up the floor. Neither my partner or I called it. Within a few seconds A2 fouled the Team B dribbler. I called it, we set up for FT's and I went directly to the coach. He was already looking expectantly at me and said "we can't foul #55?" I replied "You can, but it would considered an Intentional foul. He has to have the ball or be involved in play somehow, not just running up the court. High schools rules are different from NBA -- you can't Hack-a-Shaq here". The coach gave a dejected sigh but nodded. We kept playing and B55 got the ball through normal play and they fouled him. But Team A still lost.

Not really sure what I could have done better. Should I have immediately gone and talked to the A coach after his player told me their plan? Should I have said nothing and just called an INT when they tried hugging B55? What do you guys think?

I would have told the kid you just can't go grab him or shove him. Needs have ball..etc. something short and firm. If they still go run and foul him on other side of floor then I'd call the intentional. I wouldn't tell a coach before anything at that age. I'd expect the coach or players to know. If they don't already, calling it is the way to teach them. If it's 5th grade and under I'd do something different.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by AremRed

I had an intentional fouling situation this past weekend. 7th grade boys I think, a player (A1) ran over to me after a timeout and said "Mr. Ref we are going to try and foul B55 on the other team after we score". I replied "Ok, make sure he has the ball and you go for the ball". He said nothing, but ran to his place. Team A scored, Team B inbounded the ball and a guard dribbled up the floor. Sure enough, a Team A player (A3) was trying to hug B55 on his way up the floor. Neither my partner or I called it. Within a few seconds A2 fouled the Team B dribbler. I called it, we set up for FT's and I went directly to the coach. He was already looking expectantly at me and said "we can't foul #55?" I replied "You can, but it would considered an Intentional foul. He has to have the ball or be involved in play somehow, not just running up the court. High schools rules are different from NBA -- you can't Hack-a-Shaq here". The coach gave a dejected sigh but nodded. We kept playing and B55 got the ball through normal play and they fouled him. But Team A still lost.

Not really sure what I could have done better. Should I have immediately gone and talked to the A coach after his player told me their plan? Should I have said nothing and just called an INT when they tried hugging B55? What do you guys think?

You should have called an IPF when Team A was fouling B55 away from the play.

Some people worry about trying to determine when the kids are old enough and the coaches experienced enough for actual rules enforcement. I see that as problematic because it is naturally subjective.

Instead, I would advise any official to focus upon his role in the contest. Be a neutral arbiter: protect the safety of all players and properly and fairly enforce the rules.

If the league/event hires real referees for the contests, then the real rules should be used and enforced. This isn't a Harlem Globetrotters show. Officials aren't props or coaches on the floor.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by deecee

To the earlier reply about "explaining" to a coach about take-foul scenarios: This is not the time for a rules clinic. It's ok to explain a ruling after the fact but not before. It's also imperative when you know a team MAY be fouling to get the FIRST foul. Some coaches will be asses no matter the outcome.

I had a game where the coach pretty much told me what they were about to do. At the first sign of contact I blew my whistle which came just a fraction of a second before a second defender stole the ball (which if the coach didn't tell me what he was doing and the primary defender had been .5 seconds later it would have been a no call and steal). The coach "questioned" the call 30 feet away, and I responded with a T (not like he was a saint all game either). If he didn't tell me what he did I may not have T'd him for his behavior, but the fact that he did and then acted that way is the behavior that, I think, as officials we don't do a good enough job of addressing.

This is exactly why such situations shouldn't be handled in the described manner.
Officials shouldn't alter what a foul is near the end of the game. Call the contact the same as you did earlier in the contest. There is a proper way to foul for a strategic purpose. If the team cannot do that, then officials shouldn't be rewarding their poor execution. More importantly to this story, slight contact which would not have been deemed a foul previously in the game should not be whistled at this point. To do so is unfair. The camp advice of "call the first foul" does not equate to whistle as soon as someone breathes on the opponent. See an actual foul before calling anything.

[ODog]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

... slight contact which would not have been deemed a foul previously in the game should not be whistled at this point. To do so is unfair.

Eh, if a team is clearly trying to foul and is able to make that "slight contact," I'm getting that immediately. Otherwise, things can escalate pretty quickly when defenders take the "Ok, then I guess I need to step up the contact" tack.

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Or a better basketball!!!

Peace

How would a different basketball help solve the problem?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SC Official

How would a different basketball help solve the problem?

You need something better if that is the final score with the so-called best two teams.

Peace