How would you handle??

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

BZ:

You didn't read my two posts in this thread very carefully. First, read NFHS R4-S19-A3, and then re-read my two posts. After you have done that I will post a real situation where an intentional techncial foul occured during a live ball and there was no contact involved.

MTD, Sr.

Go back and read what I said. I could swear I used the words INTENTIONAL TECHNICAL FOUL.

So this is your way of saying there is no situation where the rule book gives a penalty of an INTENTIONAL foul without contact.

Nice to see you avoid answering EVERY time you are cornered.

I'll sum it up for you. An intentional foul, with 2 shots and the ball at the spot nearest the foul, is a contact foul during a LIVE ball. A non-contact intentional foul during a LIVE ball is a TECHNICAL foul, with 2 shots and the ball at the DL opposite the table. A contact foul during a DEAD ball is also a TECHNICAL foul that is either intentional or flagrant.

So I repeat, give us all a situation where we have an intentional foul penalty WITHOUT contact during a live ball.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

BZ:

In your first post in this thread you stated that and I quote: “An intentional foul may or may not be a technical foul, but is ALWAYS a contact foul, 4-19-3.” I said that this is not a completely true statement. I stated in my response to your first post was that: “No where in NFHS R4-S19-A3 (nor in the NCAA Rules for that matter) does it say that contact must occur for a foul to be intentional.” I also stated that R4-S19-A3 also states that: “A foul that "neutralize[s] an opponent's obvious advantageous position" is an intentional foul.

You asked me to give an example of an intentional technical foul where no contact is involved. I will do better than give an example; I will relate an actual play that occurred during the 2003 YBOA GirlsÂ’ National Championship Tournament. I was not officiating in the game, because I was scheduled to officiate in the following game. The official who made the call is Daryl Long who has posted in this forum in the past.

The intentional technical foul occurred during a 13U Bracket Play game. Let me set the stage for you. As one sits at the ScorerÂ’s/TimerÂ’s Table, Team AÂ’ bench is to the right and Team BÂ’s bench is to the left. Team A was losing to Team B by two points with six seconds left in the fourth quarter. Team A had received a designated spot throw-in on the sideline in front of Team BÂ’s bench just to the left of the coaching box. Daryl was the Trail official. Team A set up in a line perpendicular to the sideline for its throw-in play; A1 was the player making the throw-in. The YBOA National Championship Tournaments are played using NFHS Rules and the coaching box. Coach B was sitting on his bench in the middle of what is his teamÂ’s coaching box. Daryl places the ball at A1Â’s disposal; A2 breaks for Team AÂ’ basket, and A1 hits A2 with a perfect baseball at the division line and A2 drives in for an uncontested layup. The buzzer sounds and the game goes into overtime.

With six seconds left in overtime we have déjÃ* vu all over again, only this time the score is tied. And when A1 (who is about 5Â’-04” tall) attempts to throw her baseball pass, Coach B (who is about 6Â’-02” tall) jumps up in front of A1 preventing her from throwing the ball to a wide open A2 who has no defender between her and Team AÂ’s basket. Daryl immediately put air in the whistle. Coach B has committed an intentional technical foul. What did Coach B do that was infraction of the rules? His actions “neutralize[d] an opponentÂ’s obvious advantageous position” as defined in NFHS R4-S19-A3.

No contact was involved but Coach BÂ’s actions were definitely intentional and therefore an illegal act and were definitely an intentional technical foul. You are incorrect when you state the R4-S19-A3 only pertains to acts meant to stop the game clock at the end of the game, it can also apply to contact away from the ball that do not have anything to do with stopping the game clock. An intentional foul also be excessive contact with an opponent. That is why I told you to go back and re-read R4-S19-A3; this rule contains more information than many people realize because the vast majority of the time it is used only when a team fouls to stop the clock.

MTD, Sr.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
With six seconds left in overtime we have déjÃ* vu all over again, only this time the score is tied. And when A1 (who is about 5Â’-04” tall) attempts to throw her baseball pass, Coach B (who is about 6Â’-02” tall) jumps up in front of A1 preventing her from throwing the ball to a wide open A2 who has no defender between her and Team AÂ’s basket.

You can use whatever linguistic gymnastics you want, this is "a travesty" and automatic forfeit in my book.

[Mark Dexter]

To heck with an intentional technical, I have a flagrant technical foul (at the very least).

If possible, I'll let A inbound the ball and call a delayed T. The second B touches the ball, whistle - A is getting 2 shots and the ball back.

As to a forfeit, I'd be pretty darn close to calling the game. Not sure if I would or not, though.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
BZ:

In your first post in this thread you stated that and I quote: “An intentional foul may or may not be a technical foul, but is ALWAYS a contact foul, 4-19-3.” I said that this is not a completely true statement. I stated in my response to your first post was that: “No where in NFHS R4-S19-A3 (nor in the NCAA Rules for that matter) does it say that contact must occur for a foul to be intentional.” I also stated that R4-S19-A3 also states that: “A foul that "neutralize[s] an opponent's obvious advantageous position" is an intentional foul.

You asked me to give an example of an intentional technical foul where no contact is involved. I will do better than give an example; I will relate an actual play that occurred during the 2003 YBOA GirlsÂ’ National Championship Tournament. I was not officiating in the game, because I was scheduled to officiate in the following game. The official who made the call is Daryl Long who has posted in this forum in the past.

The intentional technical foul occurred during a 13U Bracket Play game. Let me set the stage for you. As one sits at the ScorerÂ’s/TimerÂ’s Table, Team AÂ’ bench is to the right and Team BÂ’s bench is to the left. Team A was losing to Team B by two points with six seconds left in the fourth quarter. Team A had received a designated spot throw-in on the sideline in front of Team BÂ’s bench just to the left of the coaching box. Daryl was the Trail official. Team A set up in a line perpendicular to the sideline for its throw-in play; A1 was the player making the throw-in. The YBOA National Championship Tournaments are played using NFHS Rules and the coaching box. Coach B was sitting on his bench in the middle of what is his teamÂ’s coaching box. Daryl places the ball at A1Â’s disposal; A2 breaks for Team AÂ’ basket, and A1 hits A2 with a perfect baseball at the division line and A2 drives in for an uncontested layup. The buzzer sounds and the game goes into overtime.

With six seconds left in overtime we have déjÃ* vu all over again, only this time the score is tied. And when A1 (who is about 5Â’-04” tall) attempts to throw her baseball pass, Coach B (who is about 6Â’-02” tall) jumps up in front of A1 preventing her from throwing the ball to a wide open A2 who has no defender between her and Team AÂ’s basket. Daryl immediately put air in the whistle. Coach B has committed an intentional technical foul. What did Coach B do that was infraction of the rules? His actions “neutralize[d] an opponentÂ’s obvious advantageous position” as defined in NFHS R4-S19-A3.

No contact was involved but Coach BÂ’s actions were definitely intentional and therefore an illegal act and were definitely an intentional technical foul. You are incorrect when you state the R4-S19-A3 only pertains to acts meant to stop the game clock at the end of the game, it can also apply to contact away from the ball that do not have anything to do with stopping the game clock. An intentional foul also be excessive contact with an opponent. That is why I told you to go back and re-read R4-S19-A3; this rule contains more information than many people realize because the vast majority of the time it is used only when a team fouls to stop the clock.

MTD, Sr.

Thinks, you just proved me to be correct.

I asked you to show me a situation where we penalized for an INTENTIONAL foul when there is no contact, and you whip out War and Peace for a TECHNICAL.

Once again what I said is 100% correct, 4-19-3 talks about intentional acts. Contact during a LIVE ball is an INTENTIONAL foul, with a penalty of 2 FTs and the ball nearest the spot. Contact during a DEAD ball is an intentional or flagrant TECHNICAL foul, with a penalty of 2 shots and the ball at the DL opposite. Non-contact acts deemed intentional to disadvantage the opponent are also TECHNICAL fouls and carry that penalty.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by rainmaker

You can use whatever linguistic gymnastics you want, this is "a travesty" and automatic forfeit in my book.

Juulie:

Daryl is a very veteran H.S. and college official. For years he was the top evaluator of women's officials in Div. I conference. His call was the correct call. This was not an act that called for the game to be forfeited.

MTD, Sr.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Somebody, anybody:

Please tell BZ to take a Valium and go back and read my posts in this thread.

MTD, Sr.



BZ:

Go back and read your first post. You made a statement that was not correct. Now read the rest of my posts. I have answered your question like I said I would and gave you an example of an intentional foul where no contact is involved. Of course the intentional foul has to be a technical foul if no contact is involved. But read your first post, you stated, and I quote you once again: "An intentional foul may or may not be a technical foul, but is ALWAYS a contact foul, 4-19-3." That is not a true statement.

MTD, Sr.

[Adam]

I think the big question that everyone seems to be dancing around is this.
In NFHS, is there such an animal as an "intentional technical foul?"
I don't recall reading about it, and I have never seen one issued.
The 2nd question, if there is one, why?
There is literally no difference in penalties. 2 shots by any shooter and ball at division line.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Somebody, anybody:

Please tell BZ to take a Valium and go back and read my posts in this thread.

MTD, Sr.



BZ:

Go back and read your first post. You made a statement that was not correct. Now read the rest of my posts. I have answered your question like I said I would and gave you an example of an intentional foul where no contact is involved. Of course the intentional foul has to be a technical foul if no contact is involved. But read your first post, you stated, and I quote you once again: "An intentional foul may or may not be a technical foul, but is ALWAYS a contact foul, 4-19-3." That is not a true statement.

MTD, Sr.

MTD says,"Of course an intentional foul has to be a TECHNICAL foul if there is NO CONTACT involved."

Which is EXACTLY the same thing as an intentional foul is always a contact foul, because WITHOUT IT, it is a TECHNICAL foul.

You NEVER answered ANYTHING! I asked, "Give us a situation where we penalize with an intentional foul penalty during a live ball without contact."

You gave us nothing but TECHNICAL foul penalties.

[Edited by blindzebra on Jan 10th, 2005 at 01:30 PM]

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Snaqwells
I think the big question that everyone seems to be dancing around is this.
In NFHS, is there such an animal as an "intentional technical foul?"
I don't recall reading about it, and I have never seen one issued.
The 2nd question, if there is one, why?
There is literally no difference in penalties. 2 shots by any shooter and ball at division line.

I agree. I'd have worded it differently. "Who cares?"

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Snaqwells
I think the big question that everyone seems to be dancing around is this.
In NFHS, is there such an animal as an "intentional technical foul?"
I don't recall reading about it, and I have never seen one issued.
The 2nd question, if there is one, why?
There is literally no difference in penalties. 2 shots by any shooter and ball at division line.

Suppose you don't have the IT foul.

Suppose you have contact that's not flagrant, but is worthy of a foul, during a dead ball.

What are you going to call?

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Somebody, anybody:

Please tell BZ to take a Valium and go back and read my posts in this thread.

MTD, Sr.



BZ:

Go back and read your first post. You made a statement that was not correct. Now read the rest of my posts. I have answered your question like I said I would and gave you an example of an intentional foul where no contact is involved. Of course the intentional foul has to be a technical foul if no contact is involved. But read your first post, you stated, and I quote you once again: "An intentional foul may or may not be a technical foul, but is ALWAYS a contact foul, 4-19-3." That is not a true statement.

MTD, Sr.

Let's also re-read 4-19-3. The first 9 words are interesting.

An intentional foul is a PERSONAL or technical foul...

Now let's look at 4-19-1, a PERSONAL foul is a player foul which involves illegal CONTACT.

That sure seems to say that an intentional foul NEEDS to have contact.

[Adam]

Originally posted by blindzebra

Let's also re-read 4-19-3. The first 9 words are interesting.

An intentional foul is a PERSONAL or technical foul...

Now let's look at 4-19-1, a PERSONAL foul is a player foul which involves illegal CONTACT.

That sure seems to say that an intentional foul NEEDS to have contact.

No, it doesn't by the definitions you just gave. It leaves open the possibility of a Intentional Technical foul, which does not have to involve contact.

[Adam]

Originally posted by bob jenkins

Suppose you don't have the IT foul.

Suppose you have contact that's not flagrant, but is worthy of a foul, during a dead ball.

What are you going to call?

A technical foul.

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Snaqwells

A technical foul.

Fouls under 4-19-5a,b,c,d,f do not involve contact.

Fouls under 4-19-5c are ITs or FTs. That's the case presented above. If you didn't have an IT, and it wasn't an FT, you'd have nothing to call. So, we can't just drop the IT. Changing the definition of T to include contact while the ball is dead would be worse, imho.