Boys Frosh.

Team B down by 5 points 1:30 left with only 2 team fouls.
Team B is fouling to try to get 7 team fouls. First 3 fouls are good fouls going after the ball. B1 hugs A1 after inbounds pass. No attempt to play the ball. Int. foul on b1, 2 shots and the ball. What do you think?

In general, where should int. foul be called in the end of game situations. SHirt grab and breakaway fouls of course.

When I'm reffing, this is definately an intentional foul.

(Except maybe in a co-rec game - and then they better be teammates!)

Nope, just call the foul and let it go. No need to add insult to injury. Now if he takes him down like a tackle, then......call the intentional.

Disagree. "Hugging" with no attempt at the ball is an easy intentional. It was even a POE last year. It's not a "basketball play", so let's get it out of the game.

I kind of disagree. When you know the other team is trying to foul to stop the clock and a play huggs the ball handler in an attempt to stop the clock, why call an intential foul? Just stop the play with a common foul. I guess it would be a judgement call on the officials behalf.

1. Because it's an obvious intentional foul.
2. Because it was HS POE just one year ago.
3. Because Hank Nicols says to in his annual NCAA video.

Ok, like I said, judgement.

This one is not a judgement call, the POE states that its a Intentional Foul, and that is what it should be called.

If you read the definition of an intentional foul this pretty much would be the picture that it is trying to paint. Not much judgement involved with this one.

[Edited by Ed Maeder on Jan 3rd, 2005 at 12:28 PM]

I'd say this is a prerogative call rather than a judgment call. Kinda like when B2, losing by 35 late in the 4th, steps over the line inbounding after a made basket by A.

I should add that this scenario is different. When one team is only down by 5 with 1:30 left, the game is not over and you would be hard pressed to justify passing on this intentional foul because you didn't to "add insult to injury."
aw

[Edited by Snaqwells on Jan 3rd, 2005 at 11:34 AM]

Okay, maybe judgement is the wrong word. How about calling the foul right at the point of contact or before the hug? I just find it hard to believe that during a tight game, an intential foul would be called when in fact you know for a fact that the coach wants to foul to stop the clock.

My sentiments exactly Snaqwells.

If you still have last year's rule book, it might be helpful if you read a section of it (on page 74):

<B><U>2003-04 POINTS OF EMPHASIS</b></u>
<b>6 END-OF-GAME SITUATIONS/INTENTIONAL FOULS</b>
<i>When a player fouls and an opponent is clearly not playing the ball, an intentional foul <b>MUST BE CALLED</b>.</i>

It couldn't be any plainer as to exactly how the NFHS wants this play to be called. There's no judgement involved. It's an intentional foul if the defender wraps somebody up without playing the ball.

Its not a judgement call in this play. Go back to both the NHFS and NCAA rules books and read the definition of an intentional personal foul. If the rules committees were to put a picture in the rules book foul would be the picture of an intentional foul. And what do you mean "no need to add insult to injury?"

MTD, Sr.

Because fouling to stop the clock is by explicit rule definition an intentional foul. You might want to review 4-19-3.

IMHO this one's a no brainer - call the X. To not do so gives an advantage to the fouling team and disadvantage to the team that was fouled.