Why won't they call the intentional?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

The Tenn/OSU crew made this call in the 1st half. Thad Matta of OSU went crazy over the call but I thought it was a great call.

I know this happened in the OSU/Wisconsin game. Did it happen in the Tennessee game as well?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Rich Fronheiser

I know this happened in the OSU/Wisconsin game. Did it happen in the Tennessee game as well?

Yep, on a fast break in the 1st half.

[MadCityRef]

I have taken to asking the coach of the trailing team if he's going to foul to stop the clock. That way I call the first hack and avoid escalation since we let a lot of contact go during the game. Problems occur in the late moments because too many of us let the small contact go waiting for something more. I've seen that create more hassles than it's worth. Call it early and avoid tempers flaring at the end.
Yes, when you see an intentional foul, call it. Every year, NF has this as a POE because we don't.
Years ago NCAA tried making all fouls in the final two minutes two shots to stop the hackfest at the end of games. It didn't work.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by MadCityRef

I have taken to asking the coach of the trailing team if he's going to foul to stop the clock.

Good luck with that. Jmo, but one day, that's gonna come back and bite you in the butt- big time.

Just call what happens. Don't anticipate anything.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by MadCityRef

I have taken to asking the coach of the trailing team if he's going to foul to stop the clock. That way I call the first hack and avoid escalation since we let a lot of contact go during the game. Problems occur in the late moments because too many of us let the small contact go waiting for something more.

Are you aware that your method is exactly the opposite of what the NFHS instructed officials to do in this year's POE?

2006-07 POINTS OF EMPHASIS

#5 Rules Enforcement and Proper Use of Signals.
The committee has seen a movement away from the consistent application of rule enforcement and use of approved mechanics/signals.
A. Rules Enforcement. Officials need to be aware that personal interpretations of the rules have a negative impact on the game. The rules are written to provide a balance between offense and defense, minimize risks to participants, promote the sound tradition of the game and promote fair play. Individual philosophies and deviations from the rules as written negatively impact the basic fundamentals and tenants of the rules. Officials must be consistent in the application of all rules, including:
• Contact – Contact that is not considered a foul early in the game should not be considered a foul late in the game simply because a team "wants" to foul. Conversely, contact that is deemed intentional late in the game should likewise be called intentional early in the game.
• Closely Guarded – Officials must properly judge the six-foot distance and begin a closely-guarded count when a defender obtains a legal guarding position. Failure to properly judge the six-foot distance and require the defender to be within three or four feet of the dribbler before beginning the closely-guarded count puts the defensive player in an unfair position. The count terminates when the dribbler gets head and shoulders past the defender.
• Coaching Box – In states that authorize the use of the optional coaching box, the head coach is the only person on the bench that is permitted to stand and must remain in the coaching box. All other bench personnel must remain seated at all times except when a team member is reporting to the scorer's table, during time-outs or intermissions, and to spontaneously react to a play.

[mplagrow]

Originally Posted by MadCityRef

I have taken to asking the coach of the trailing team if he's going to foul to stop the clock.

Wow, JR is right. I could see this going south fast. You should know enough to know when to anticipate this without asking the coach. Here's why:

"Coach, you guys gonna foul?"
"Yeah, we'll try."
B1 goes in and comes out with the ball for a steal. You blow the whistle when B1 got close. Coach goes ballistic.
"You're just calling it because I told you--it was a clean steal!"

[zebraman]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I just don't understand this reluctance to call an intentional foul. It seems that there are quite a few officials out there who just won't call one.

Just speaking for my local area:

When I started HS officiating 10 years ago, the D-1 officials in our local HS association pretty much ran the show. Their philosophy was to ignore coaches unless they were screaming profanities in your face and to not call an intentional foul unless someone was raped and pillaged. It put a lot of pressure on our younger officials to call it the same way. As a result, we managed coaches poorly and rarely called a much-deserved intentional foul.

As the years have gone by, a lot of that "older guard" is gone. The leaders in our group (still some D-1 officials in that group) no longer share those extreme philosophies. I think our local group now manages coaches as well as anyone in the state and for the most part, I think we call intentional fouls when appropriate.

[sj]

.....Their philosophy was to ignore coaches unless they were screaming profanities in your face and to not call an intentional foul unless someone was raped and pillaged.


I guess a question is why they wanted to do it this way.

[zebraman]

Originally Posted by sj

.....Their philosophy was to ignore coaches unless they were screaming profanities in your face and to not call an intentional foul unless someone was raped and pillaged.


I guess a question is why they wanted to do it this way.

Because that was the philosophy of the D-1 assignor that they worked for.

[sj]

Originally Posted by zebraman

Because that was the philosophy of the D-1 assignor that they worked for.

That's what I've seen and I'd agree. Now the next question is why do the D-1 assignors want the issue of calling intentional fouls handled the way it is being called?