![]() |
|
|||
"Not...Based Solely on the Severity of the Act"
Given that a foul intentionally committed "...may be strategic to stop the clock..." (POE #3), and "Fouling near the end of a game is an acceptable coaching and playing strategy" (4.19.3D COMMENT), the expectations expressed in this year's POE seem to mandate that we call "Intentional Foul" on any end-of-game foul committed in order to stop the clock which is done:
...without playing the ball ...against a player away from the ball ...regardless of the degree of severity or lack thereof. Question #1: Am I reading this POE correctly? Anything I'm missing? Question #2: With those parameters in mind, am I correct that each of these "end-of-game" fouls they want us to instruct officials to call "Intentional", in spite of the minimal level of severity? They Want Us to Call This "Intentional", Right? #1 They Want Us to Call This "Intentional", Right? #2 They Want Us to Call This "Intentional", Right? #3 They Want Us to Call This "Intentional", Right? #4 They Want Us to Call This "Intentional", Right? #5 They Want Us to Call This "Intentional", Right? #6 They Want Us to Call This "Intentional", Right? #7
__________________
Making Every Effort to Be in the Right Place at the Right Time, Looking at the Right Thing to Make the Right Call Last edited by Freddy; Tue Oct 10, 2017 at 01:02pm. |
Bookmarks |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
2016 NCAA Rule Change: OBS - "About to Receive" vs. "In the act of Catching" | teebob21 | Softball | 15 | Wed Mar 02, 2016 10:16pm |
NHSF "intentional" vs NCAA "flagarent" terminology | Duffman | Basketball | 17 | Wed Feb 08, 2012 10:15pm |
Is "the patient whistle" and "possession consequence" ruining the game? | fiasco | Basketball | 46 | Fri Dec 02, 2011 08:43am |
ABC's "Nightline" examines "worst calls ever" tonight | pizanno | Basketball | 27 | Fri Jul 04, 2008 06:08am |