Here's where I think the team control foul rule is unfair.

Both teams in bonus, just over 1 minute on clock, team A has a 1 point lead.

A1 is dribbling ball in front court. Defender B1 legally bats ball away from A1 into backcourt. Now picture the ball rolling into the backcourt and B1 a step ahead ready to scoop up the ball for an easy lay-up. A1 now in a last ditch effort to get the ball dives in and fouls B1 (not intentionally). So we have a team control foul on A1 and the throw-in is administered at the nearest spot which is probably still 25 feet from the endline.

I think in this case team A profits too much by committing the foul. If A1 doesn't foul here B1 has a lay-up attempt. If A1 fouls a split second after B1 scoops up the ball B1 is at the line.

My personal philosophy here is to really have my antenna up for a possible intentional foul call, but you can't call something that isn't there.

It's not the TC foul you think is unfair, I would say you have a problem with the definition of TC.

I also think they did it to help move the game along too. Get rid of all of the free throws.

I'm with you. I was under the impression from JR's post that there was some specific way for there to be no team control during a loose ball as I described it in the OP, which goes against everything I have studied on team control since coming back to officiating this year. Since I believe he's talking about fouls during a loose ball when there's no team control (during a jump, after a try, or during a throw-in before any player has controlled the ball), I have to disagree that the NFHS has gone to a specific "loose ball" foul.

It was obvious that I was saying a "loose ball" foul call would be some designated exception to the team control foul during a loose ball while team control existed.

You could always submit a rule change suggestion to the NFHS to institute the NBA's "clear-path-to-the-basket" foul. It covers your situation pretty closely.

Or maybe change the definition of team control so that it ends when the defense deflects the ball. I don't think I like that idea, but you could try.

You know what happens when you assume something.

You posted that there was <i>"no good way to differentiate when a loose-ball foul should be team control and when it shouldn't"</i> Well, that's completely wrong imo. My point was that if you want to understand when to call a team-control foul, then you had better know exactly what comprises "team control". To do so, you learn rule 4-12. If you know rule 4-12, then rule 4-19-7 is easily applied. Iow, if you do understand what team-control is, then you <b>know</b> when to differentiate between a team-control foul and a foul with no team control present.

The FED told you <b>exactly</b> how to differentiate the 2 cases when they wrote rule 4-12.

Fair enough, though my response that you quoted was not how to differentiate when it should be called according to the rules as they stand. I understand team control as it is defined in the rule book. What I was responding to was the question by another poster regarding how the rule might be changed to allow a "loose-ball" foul that would be an exception to team control and allow free throws.

I guess my mistake was assuming that others understood the context in which I posted that. Apparently I need to communicate more clearly...damn message boards! :D

This is a play where I'll have a VERY slow whistle. If B1 still gets the ball and is able to head to the basket for the unhindered layup, I will not call the foul at all....even if it looked ugly. If it takes B1 out, foul. Advantage. No good coach will be upset about 2 points on the board instead of 2 FTs. In fact, many will be disappointed if you do call this foul.