What do you all think of the common foul call with about 3:30 left in the first half? Coach and players wanted an intentional. It looked to me that he was going in the general direction of the ball but wasn't really trying to get at it.

I have to disagree. From what I saw, the defender reached around to go after the ball. I think the calling official made a good decision not to call the intentional foul. At least that is based on what I saw.

Peace

I'm not disagreeing with the call. I'm not sure what I would have called (common or intentional). I was just interested in your opinion.

The defender wrapped his right arm around the shooter's hip and then came around and swatted down with the left hand across the shooter's arms.

The L could not see that grab by the right hand. All he could see was the left hand and arm across the shooter's arms. From that viewpoint, he was playing the ball.

Good call.

[Edited by BktBallRef on Mar 24th, 2005 at 10:47 PM]

Thought I've read that "going for the ball" isn't part of the criteria for determination of the intentional foul. Don't remember where I saw this.

zebra44,
If you aren't playing the ball then you are playing the ballhandler with full intention to foul.
Most fouls could be called intentional. All holds, all pushes, all blocks.
mick

Those must have been the free throws for the foul. I believe the clock was stopped at exactly 3:38 when the foul was called.

It sure looked to me like the defender attempted to wrap him up so he couldn't get the shot off. I thought it would be called intentional. First with the defender's right hand, then his left. He got a double shot at him.

Never saw it. :(

This is why regional coverage is a big negative.

Frank, as I said in my post, there's no way the L could see the right hand.

Coaches, players, fans and especially comentators are usually right when it comes to things like this. Majority rules?, Hey it's to bad, because they don't have the whistle. Shrug, smirk, LOL!

I agree Tony...L couldn't see it, but the C certainly could and he could have come in with that information or maybe had a double whistle...altho the way these guys have been going in the tourny, the whistle blows and the calling official is GONE immediately to the table, so C probably couldn't have done much anyway...

I saw the play while eating dinner with the family (talked her into going to a sports bar). At first glance, I thought he was calling a held ball. He got a lot of ball with the left hand, IMO. The right hand, completely straight-lined from the L, could have warranted an X. I thought the shooting foul was appropriate, though. I noticed Pearl had a long talk with him leading into the commercial break.

Mick, I'm sure I read an article somewhere that discussed a seriously hard swipe at the ball (I'm talking katate chop)being disregarded and the IF called. The intent was to not allow the shot to get off by a violent play on the ball.

Even if you read an article about what guidelines to use when calling an Intentional Foul that does not take away the judgment of the official that makes the call. If there is this much debate if an intentional foul should be called or not, then it probably should not have been called. I did not see the play but I think any intentional foul should be a little more cut and dry.