5 seconds to go the other night in a 9th grade game, team A up by 4. Team A inbounds and advances ball to division line where B1 grabs A1 lightly around midsection, clearly not going for the ball. It was a wimpy foul at best and B's chances of winning are a long-shot. My area and I call - not thrilled - an intentional for not playing the ball (remembering the NFHS guide POE, p.11 "When a player fouls and the opponent is clearly not playing the ball, an intentional foul must be called."

Naturally the team and its fans thought it was excessive. I explained to both coaches and teams why I called it as I did.

Should I have done things differently?

No. Pretty cut and dried intentional.

4-19-3 It....is not based on the severity of the act.

why did you have to explain it?

By the book. If you signaled it they knew what you called

I just wanted to make sure the coach understood what NFHS rules and POE were. He didn\'t appear to, and claimed his player was going for the ball - maybe he meant \'balls\'.

I felt I knew what I was doing with the call, but it was a little bit of wonderin\' whether I should have let it go. However, they need to know what the rules state. Thanks for the feedback.

There is no reason for you to explain anything. They should have a rulebook or they can get them. If they cannot read, no reason for you to explain it to them. Now if there is a question about what you saw, that is a bit different. But that time in the game is not for a rules clinic. Especially at that level.

Peace

[B][QUOTE]Originally posted by MtnGoatinStripes He didn\'t appear to, and claimed his player was going for the ball - maybe he meant \'balls\'.

Well, we know you have a pair because you made the right call:D

If you can see this coming, which you can\'t always, at a dead ball, just say, "Remember to go for the ball when you foul." This might prevent your type of situation.

Totally different subject, and I apologize for being in the "easily distracted" group; but I often do this during a break-away where the player is likely to try to dunk the ball. As I\'m running ahead of him to the endline, I just say to him "Don\'t hang!" It works.

You must be setting up as the trail at the 28\' line in the backcourt :D

Yes, you shouldn\'t have explained the call.

Nuh-uh. Honest.

Wille, when you quote, enter your reply AFTER the /B] /QUOTE]. It should appear like this.

Well, we know you have a pair because you made the right call :D

I had an intentional this week too. Tell me if it was correct in your opinions, obviously the coach thought it was a little severe. A is inbounding the ball B is in a full court press. B steals the ball near mid court and comes back for a layup. A1 obviously beaten on the play looks like he is going to do the old run close to the shooter routine, but as he goes by he sees he will probably make contact, and at this time does a little two hands in the back thing. It wasn\'t severe, and it was in the first couple minutes of the game, but he did push him in the back I called intentional, would you all have done the same??

thanks

This is a tough one, mathews. If it was just a bump, and didn\'t really affect the play, I\'d probably call it a personal, and give a stern warning to both player and coach. But much more contact at all, and yea, I\'m giving the big X. it\'s a really dangerous foul, because the shooter doesn\'t see it coming and is very vulnerable in the air. And as you said, if the shooter has an obvious advantage that can only be rmoved by fouling, and there\'s no play on the ball -- well, that\'s textbook.