Dead Ball , Incidental Contact ?

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by Rick82358

Rule 10-13 section 15 article 1
An intentional Technical foul involves intentionally contacting an opponent in a non-flagrant manner while the ball is dead.
If you determined the contact deserved a penalty (which you did, and as described I agree) your only choice is was it flagrant because the ball is dead this is your only option.

As far as the question about a screen - we are trapped if we make the call - you can not have a personal foul on a dead ball.

Rick, you are citing an NCAA rule and we are talking about NFHS here. Even so, you don't understand that college rule correctly. Calling a flagrant foul is definitely not the only option during a dead ball in an NCAA game. The very rule that you quoted says "contacting an opponent in a non-flagrant manner while the ball is dead." There is a specific call for that in an NCAA mens game. It is an intentional technical foul. The NCAA womens game does not have this rule.

Also, your assertion that we cannot have a personal foul during a dead ball is wrong. Contact fouls committed by or on an airborne shooter during a dead ball are personal fouls.

Originally posted by Chess Ref
1. Am I correct in that this foul falls under the Int, flagrant or let it go Sitch ?

Yep, dead ball contact is governed by NFHS 4-19-1 NOTE: "Contact after the ball has become dead is ignored unless it is ruled intentional or flagrant or is committed by or on an airborne shooter."

Good job learning something from the forum and realizing how it should come into play on the court. Even though you didn't handle it right this time, you were alert enough to realize it and will certainly nail it next time.

Originally posted by Chess Ref

If this occurred in a live ball Sitch i would call a foul but not an INT.

That right there tells you that you should not have called a foul on this play. This dead ball contact did not rise to the level of intentional in your opinion and therefore should have been ignored. If you want to have a quiet word with the player that is fine.

As for the suggestion that the official should just deem the ball to be at the disposal and thus live, I'll respond that unless the official administering the throw-in had begun the five second count the ball is still dead, and I believe that saying otherwise is the wrong thing to do. It is unfair to contort the rules like that.
There are other concerns at work here that have to be considered.
If the scoring team's coach had requested a time-out should it be granted at this time? If so, then his player should be penalized appropriately for his dead ball contact. To "protect" his player from a T while also conferring upon his team the ability to request a time-out is an unfair advantage. The ball is either live or it is dead. They can't have you "call it both ways."