Why won't they call the intentional?

[Old School]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

The thing I struggle with is when to go intentional on a layup. Clearly any contact in the back here is intentional. But what I have trouble with is the strong down chop from the side that gets the forearms. The action is reasonable close to the ball and has a chance to dislodge it but doesn't really seem designed to do so, rather it seems designed just to stop the shot. Additionally this tends to be very forceful which raises the question what is excessive force?

I have a 3-point system that I use on a break-away layup.

1.) Is it a break away layup? That is the dribble has unobstructed path to the basket, no defender in front.

2.) Hard foul from behind, designed only to stop the shot.

3.) Shooter involuntarily knocked to the floor, and is very slow to get up. Possibly hurt.

Other intangibles that are not necessary absolute or;
a.) bigger defender smaller shooter. This excessive contact is much more likely to hurt the smaller player.
b.) Any hard contact to the face on a break-away layup. Page taken from the NBA.
c.) retaliation by the defender for losing the ball and giving up easy play.

Last, coaches teach that if you are going to foul here, make sure the guy doesn't make the shot. This makes the foul that much harder. It is being taught, it is the objective of the defender. Coaches will argue (talk out both sides of there mouth) that my player went for the ball. Most officials will yield to this interpretation and not call it intentional. Not me, if it meets my criteria above. Intentional Foul everytime! And I then tell the coach what he would tell me if it was his player on the floor, protect the shooter!

[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.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Old School

I have a 3-point system that I use on a break-away layup.

1.) Is it a break away layup? That is the dribble has unobstructed path to the basket, no defender in front.

2.) Hard foul from behind, designed only to stop the shot.

3.) Shooter now on the floor hurt, and is very slow to get up.

I don't like your system.
By #3 are you saying that you only call an intentional foul when the offended player is hurt? That's ridiculous.

[Old School]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I don't like your system.
By #3 are you saying that you only call an intentional foul when the offended player is hurt? That's ridiculous.

No, all 3 needs to be present. It is not 1 or 2, or 2 or 3, it is all 3 together. The player hitting the floor involuntarily satisfies #3. If I have a true on all these conditions, I have an intentional foul on a breakaway layup. I am not saying this is the "ONLY" condition in which you can have an I/F, or the only condition on a breakaway layup. Defender can push the player in the hip while airborne, shoving him into the wall. I/F in my book.

[Nevadaref]

What if he just shoves him from behind (a clear foul which cause the player to miss the shot), but the shooter is able to land without a problem?

[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.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

What if he just shoves him from behind (a clear foul which cause the player to miss the shot), but the shooter is able to land without a problem?

Nevada,
Remember, when you're dealing with off-season college football players, the expectations are a little different.

[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.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Old School

Last, coaches teach that if you are going to foul here, make sure the guy doesn't make the shot. This makes the foul that much harder. It is being taught, it is the objective of the defender. Coaches will argue (talk out both sides of there mouth) that my player went for the ball. Most officials will yield to this interpretation and not call it intentional. Not me, if it meets my criteria above. Intentional Foul everytime! And I then tell the coach what he would tell me if it was his player on the floor, protect the shooter!

Any official calling the foul will also make the intentional foul signal immediately. Are you really saying that MOST officials would listen to a coach argue after the intentional foul call is made and signalled, and then MOST officials would change their call because of the coach's argument?

That's just patently ridiculous, JMO. It just doesn't happen. The only officials that would ever change their intentional foul call because of a coach's arguments are the ones that work beside you in your rec leagues.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Old School

3.) Shooter involuntarily knocked to the floor, and is very slow to get up. Possibly hurt.

So.......remember folks, if the defender voluntarily knocks the shooter to the floor, it's not an intentional foul.

Heckuva system you got there, JMO. Good luck with that.

[tomegun]

Old School, one reason (IMO) is this isn't a normal personal foul is because........................it isn't a normal personal foul. Furthermore, some of these intentional fouls can lead to fights if not called properly.

You have some of the weirdest philosophies I have ever heard. You are doing a disservice to the game of basketball. If you have one, tell your mentor I said the same thing about her.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Old School

3.) Shooter involuntarily knocked to the floor, and is very slow to get up. Possibly hurt.

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

So.......remember folks, if the defender voluntarily knocks the shooter to the floor, it's not an intentional foul.

Heckuva system you got there, JMO. Good luck with that.

It is now obvious to me that he is making this stuff up as he goes. He says that he has a 3-point system, but then he changes the wording to it shortly after posting it. Look at my post #18 to see how he originally worded criterion #3. The kid didn't just have to be "knocked to the floor", he had to be hurt!

[Old School]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

It is now obvious to me that he is making this stuff up as he goes. He says that he has a 3-point system, but then he changes the wording to it shortly after posting it. Look at my post #18 to see how he originally worded criterion #3. The kid didn't just have to be "knocked to the floor", he had to be hurt!

No, I went back and adjusted the wording to fit my meaning better. It's a nice feature of the board. The point is still the same, the only people that don't get it or the ones that want to make fun of it, or looking for mistakes. I think the general populous understands what I'm trying to say. The rest of you act like children in need of a, I gotcha fix! To you, my saying from now on will be whatever....!!!

To error is human, to constantly ridicule is childish, and to that I say, whatever...

[Nevadaref]

Congratulations, you have convinced me in just the past few hours that you are not a real official. Before I gave you the benefit of the doubt, but now I will join the others on here who previously knew that you are a poser.

I will never again reply to one of your posts.

[Back In The Saddle]

Way back in the early days of football they had "mass momentum" plays. Of course, those same plays sometimes maimed and killed people and nearly got the game banned.

But the idea of mass momentum, I think, comes into play here. The mass of the momentum is away from calling IFs. IOW, more people don't call those IFs simply because more people don't call them IFs. If more people did, more people would. Very few people want to be "that guy" who calls all the IFs when nobody else does. A few brave souls with conviction will call them, the rest will not. I don't know how we change this. The NFHS has made this a POE the past 2 years, but I don't see much change.