Controversial call at end of OHSAA State Final

[deecee]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

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.

What you describe is apples and oranges in a take-foul situation. In one scenario the defender is attempting to put himself in a better situation to play better defense and could draw a foul OR could not, in the other he's simply creating the contact to draw a foul. If it's a "basketball" play then I don't call an intentional.

This sounded and was described as a rule book execution of an intentional foul.

[RefsNCoaches]

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.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by RefsNCoaches

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.

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.

[RefsNCoaches]

Originally Posted by deecee

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.

I know...I'm just saying...if the only intent by the foul is to stop the clock, then really it's probably an intentional foul. Everyone in the house knows what's going on but it doesn't get called intentional.

I guess if the "make a play on the ball" then we're calling common foul...same with the holding of a cutter. My point was that the coach could have found a better way to get the non-ball handler to the line with something less obvious. But as someone pointed out, he stated "to my understanding of the rule". Well, not all coaches know the rules....Who knew!?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by RefsNCoaches

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.

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.

[BryanV21]

I can't say all, but some officials around here will tell teams in these late game situations to make sure you're going for the ball, or something like that.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

[RefsNCoaches]

Originally Posted by Adam

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.

I understand that and agree...If you really want to stop the clock and get the non-ball handler guy who can't hit FTs to the line, you better do it in the manner I said and hold him while he's cutting so it's not so obvious...

[Old Man Ref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

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

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.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Old Man Ref

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.

Are you thinking you should have called a flagrant foul instead?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Old Man Ref

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

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.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

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.

I recall this was only a short-lived experiment (1 season, maybe) where it was official policy. Not saying it wasn't called that way in some areas, but I don't remember that it was ever the rule except for that single season.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

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.

The trendy word lately (at least around here) is, "Fire, fire, fire!"

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

[bucky]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

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.

I wonder what the code word was for wanting them to steal the ball.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

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

2012-13 POINTS OF EMPHASIS
Intentional Foul: 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: 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.

[Kansas Ref]

Is it possible to perhaps include a cursory coverage of this item {viz. strategic fouls that could be called Intentionals} in the pregame with coaches and player reps just so to make sure all participants on same page? Or would we be over-stepping our authoritative bounds---not that they'll listen to a pregame anyway.