At a Jr hi game this weekend, a player who was frustrated, pushed another player going for a lay-up from behind. The referee called an intentional technical foul.

Was this correct?

As a ref, I am confused between an intentional foul and an intentional-technical foul. I think I probably would of called it flagrant, if it was violent enough, or just intentional. What makes an intentional foul a technical?

Thanks

Intentional Personal - Live Ball Contact
Intentional Technical - Dead Ball Contact

The same goes for flagerant fouls.

The referee who made the call made a mistake.

made a mistake, unless the ball has already went through the basket when the push occured!!! :)

Theoretically, there might be such a thing as an "intentional technical", but in reality there's no reason to use it. If the ball is live, any contact foul can't be a technical. If you want to escalate the foul call in your situation, it's just an intentional. If you think the fouler was trying to hurt the shooter or otherwise starting a fight, it would be a flagrant personal foul, with the same penalty as a common foul, and the fouler is dq'ed. If the contact occurs during a dead ball, and you need to call it, it's a technical. If it's the beginning of a fight, it's a flagrant technical foul with the same penalty as a regular technical and the fouler dq'ed. Any foul that would be a T during a live ball, such as a blue phrase or subbing on the fly, or changing jerseys at the bench, would only be "intentional" if it was designed to stop the clock, but you'd still call it just a technical, give the shots and the ball at half-court. I don't think an intentional technical is anything you or I need to think about.

Three technicals
 

Thanks for the clarification.

This also happened. The player who gave the push, already had on T. The push and decision by the referee to make it an Intentional Technical was the 2nd T. Hence the player is out of the game. As the player was heading off the floor, he subsequently used loud profanity. He couldn't get a third T, so, as a ref, what's the call? A bench T??

Re: Three technicals
 

Once the coach has been notified that the player is dq, then that player is bench personnel and he can receive a third T. It may seem like it wouldn't amount to much, but there are still the shots and possession of the ball. Furthermore, the coach receives an indirect technical foul, which means his coaching box is revoked, and he has to sit for the rest of the game.

Re: Three technicals
 

Yep. Once he's been disqualified, he's now bench personnel. Give the coach an indirect for that one, too!

I probably would have called a flagorant and tossed him.

Re: Three technicals
 

Cheryl, you may be thinking of the NCAA interpretation that says a coach can't receive more than 2 direct technical fouls. (Thank you, Bobby Knight.) In HS, however, there is no such restriction on players or on coaches.

Re: Re: Three technicals
 

My personal record is 5 T's on a head coach in one game. Varsity high school. My partner got the same coach for 6 T's in the same game. Yup, 11 T's for that coach. The game was back in the very early '70s iirc- before the FED put in the 2 T-disqualification rule. At that time, there was no limit in the rules as to the number of T's allowed before bye-bye time. This particular coach wasn't actually that bad a guy; he just had a team that year that he absolutely hated. This was during the "flower child/hippie" era and his players weren't real good at listening to him. Mix that in with most of his kids showing up stoned for games and you get a coach that wasn't really enjoying himself. This particular night, he was even more pissed off at his kids than usual; I heard him say sumthin' in a huddle early in the game to his players like "I've had enough of you a$$holes. I'm gonna get thrown out so so I don't have to look at you anymore". I reported that to my partner, and we both come to the same conclusion quickly-- he wasn't goung anywhere. Iow, we suffer, you suffer. We did throw about 4 of his worse-behaving kids out though- just to give him a little more company on the bench. The coach finally did calm down later in the game when he figured out that (a) he wasn't going anywhere, and (b) all the T's he was getting were just making the game longer.

After the game, he came into our dressing room, just looked at us, shook his head and said something like "I shoulda known that I wouldn't get any mercy from you two". Broke us both up.

True story.

Re: Re: Three technicals
 

My favorite game to remember: A 6th grade tournament where a coach got 5 Ts. One for an illegal substitution and 4 for arguing the first T.

That's one record I hope I never see broken.

Chuck

While I agree that NCAA and NBA have rulings that prevent more than two T's and NFHS does not. I will never call more than two T's on a player or a coach.

If it is a coach and he picks up two he is supposed to be gone from the gym. If he does not go the game is over. I will not allow a coach to make a mockery of the game, and pick up anymore. He wants more he will just bury the game or future suspensions...

The same with a player if a player's behavior is bad enough then the administration can take this kid out or get control of him.

I hope that you don't believe that.
The statement still isn't true even if you substitute the words "normal personal" for "common."

What if the shooter makes the shot while being flagrantly fouled? ;)

In NCAAM, there is a distinction between an intentional technical (which is assessed for significant dead-ball contact) and an ordinary and a flagrant T. The ordinary T returns to POI after FTs, whereas the intentional and flagrant return to the offended team. Of course, the flagrant carries the DQ and the intentional doesn't.

In NCAAW, there is no such thing as an intentional technical.