Michigan St. vs. Duke.

Did anyone watch the Mich St./Duke game at Cameron last night? There was one play in particular that I was confused why they called it an intentional foul.

1st half Duke gets rebound or steal(not sure which), outlets ball to Redick who has open layup and is slowing up trying to draw foul as well. Mich St. player hustles and catches him fouls himfrom behind but also swats the ball away. When I saw the replay it didn't seem like it warranted an intentional foul.

Just looking for anybody's opinion that may have saw the play and wondering if NCAA is enforcing intentional fouls differently than NFHS.

[Junker]

I saw that play also. I think it may be a call that they wanted back, but I'm not strong on NCAA rules. I didn't see anything intentional on the play. My only thought was that it ended up being a hard foul in a tough game and they might have been trying to calm the action down a bit. I did notice that an announcer had something intelligent to say. Vitale was talking about too many things being reviewable slowing the game down and I have to agree. In his words, human error is part of the game and players and coaches need to play through it.

[rockyroad]

Didn't see the game, but I know that the NCAA frowns on plays where the defender comes "thru" the shooter from behind to swat the ball away...so if that's what happened, then Intentional is the call...

[DJ]

In my opinion there are not enough intentional fouls called. The intent is there but not the fortitude of the officials. I thought it was an appropriate call and also helped to assure that hard fouls would be addressed as the game progressed.

[Rick Durkee]

The MSU player's route to the ball was a little awkward and his arm came almost directly over Reddick's head to get to the ball. The replay showed that the play was much closer to clean and may not have justified the intentional call. In real time, however, the play looked much more violent, and from the angle we watched on television, it looked like an intentional.

Rick

[Robmoz]

Good call (IMO). I did see the entire game and this specific play as I watched the game with my usual "referee mentality".

As the play was properly described above, I agreed with the call simply because of the tomahawk motion used by B1 to attempt to swat at the ball from behind. This was a clearcut breakaway and although B1 made up a lot of ground to even have a chance at blocking the shot he was too late in getting there, did not have a LGP, and short of flat out grabbing A1 tried to intentionally foul to prevent the bucket. Yes, A1 did slow up at the last second in what appeared to be an attempt to draw contact but the ensuing contact was more than a blocked shot attempt by B1.

In real-time the play looked worse than the replay's.

In fact, this was a double whistle, too. The Lead official made the foul call but the Trail came in with the view of intentional; after an extremely brief chat with the Trail, the Lead went with the intentional foul call.

I only saw the play on the replay of it. I hadn't been paying attention until I heard them say it was intentional and then I wanted to see what had happened. I agree from the camera angle that would have been shown in the live shot, I can see where it would have looked much worse.

Also, I forgot to mention it but I think what got me more confused about was that I heard them say that they didn't call it intentional right away and from just seeing the replay I couldn't believe that they changed it to intentional.

Thanks for the replys.

[Jimgolf]

As a Spartan alum, I can only say, incidental contact, clean block, no foul.

[Junker]

The lead actually came out with the intentional mechanic after about a 1.5 second conversation with the other calling official (I believe the T came in with the call also). Both did a great job of not making a call until they talked. I think they went to the monitor to get the number of the offender correct.

[Robmoz]

Originally posted by Jimgolf
As a Spartan alum, I can only say, incidental contact, clean block, no foul.

Go Green!

I thought all MSU students signed up for Free-Throw 101 to get the easy credit. Apparently not many of the starting five showed up for any of those classes.

Did anyone see the MICHIGAN blowout? Oh yeah, I forgot no one cares about the Wolverine BBall team...my bad! GO GREEN!

[Junker]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Robmoz
GO GREEN!

Gotta disagree there. As an Iowa State guy, I have to root against MSU in every game after the 2000 NCAA Tourney game. Neutral site my A@#! I'm not bitter and carrying a grudge am I?

[zebraman]

Originally posted by Jerry Blum

Just looking for anybody's opinion that may have saw the play and wondering if NCAA is enforcing intentional fouls differently than NFHS.

Does anyone have the wording of the NCAA definition of intentional foul? In NFHS, the foul doesn't have to actually be "intentional" in intent. The defender could actually be playing the ball, but if excessive contact occurs, the official might call it intentional (preventative officiating - nip rough play in the bud).

Z

[Lotto]

Originally posted by zebraman

Does anyone have the wording of the NCAA definition of intentional foul?

Rule 4-26, Art. 6. Intentional personal foul. An intentional foul shall be a personal foul that, on the basis of an official’s observation of the act, is not a legitimate attempt to directly play the ball or a player. Determination of whether a personal foul is intentional shall not be based on the severity of the act. Examples include, but are not limited to:
a. Fouling a player who is away from the ball and not directly involved with the play.
b. Contact with a player making a throw-in.
c. Holding or pushing an opponent in order to stop the game clock.
d. Pushing a player from behind to prevent a score.
e. Causing excessive contact with an opponent while playing the ball.

A.R. 16. After a field goal by B1, Team A leads Team B, 61-60. A1 has the ball for a throw-in with four seconds remaining in the game. A1 holds the ball and B2 crosses the boundary line to hold A1. RULING:An intentional personal foul shall be charged to B2. The time remaining to play is not a factor. This circumstance shall not permit a warning.

Appendix III, Section 4. Intentional Personal Fouling Guidelines for calling the intentional personal foul are:
a. Any personal foul that is not a legitimate attempt to directly play the ball or a player is an intentional personal foul.
b. Running into the back of a player who has the ball, wrapping the arm(s) around a player and grabbing a player around the torso or legs are intentional personal fouls.
c. Grabbing a player’s arm or body while initially attempting to gain control by playing the ball directly is an intentional personal foul.
d. Grabbing, holding or pushing a player away from the ball is an intentional personal foul.
e. Undue roughness used to stop the game clock is an intentional personal foul and, if severe, should be called a flagrant personal foul.
f. It is an intentional personal foul when, while playing the ball, a player causes excessive contact with an opponent.
The intentional personal foul must be called within the spirit and intent of the intentional-foul rule.

[Jimgolf]

Originally posted by Robmoz
GO GREEN!

GO WHITE!
I always liked that cheer.

[rwest]

I've been told that if a player blocks a shot from behind, that I should call a foul if it is a violent tomahawk style block, even if they get all ball.

Do you agree? During a rec game at my church I called this a foul on one our ministers sons. He claimed he got all ball and he did. But he was frustrated - they were losing - and I called the foul because he swung at the ball from behind.

I know it's a HTBT, but what say you? Did I make the right call?

Thanks!