Time to foul
 

I don't know about y'all, but when I know a team is in a sitch where they need to foul, I tend to get real quick with the whistle. I hate to see a team keep whacking and grabbing and not get the ref's attention. I was watching a girl's JV game like that tonight. Team B was down 3 with a minute and a half left, and only 3 fouls on the board. It was obvious they were trying to foul, but apparently they weren't getting 'enough' contact in the officials' viewpoint.

Then B1 puts her hand right between the numbers on the back of A1 after she dribbled past and gave her a push. Obviously not a play at the ball, right? Do you have an intentional when you see that push in the back? I think I would, but it wasn't called so I was wondering what others thought.

You could use this example in a video about intentional fouls. Why even ask?

Well, the reason I ask is that it is so obviously an intentional foul--yet I still see officials who are afraid to call it that. I guess that's why they were in the JV game.

I'm with you as far as using a quick whistle during a fouling situation. I tend to think it prevents problems rather than make the fouling team push or hack very hard. It also keeps you away from having to make the intentional call when they have tried twice already to get a foul and neither of them were called.

If you have a quick whistle during "fouling situation" are you calling the game consistently? Are you calling more touch fouls than earlier in the game? I don't know if I agree with the concept but have seen it done.

When the situation calls for it and it's obvious, call it. Otherwise they'll make sure you call it by using the shove in the back or worse.

Isn't this a POE this year?? Call the intentional foul!

They still have to earn the foul
 

I have seen just the opposite. When a team needs to foul, the other team, tries to pass around before the defense can get to them. so, many times the fouls are minor contact against the person who no longer has the ball. In these cases, I don't want to reward the defense for making bad plays by giving them the foul, stopping the clock, and perhaps able to make a play later.

Having said that, if the contact is more than just minor, then I call it.

This is exactly what happened in the Nevada/Hawaii game on this past Saturday. Perhaps you should ask that officiating crew. ;) (BTW does this make them GJV officials! :eek: )

http://forum.officiating.com/showthread.php?t=31485

Great comment. The NFHS said this in one of its POEs this year.
2006-07 POINTS OF EMPHASIS
5. Rules Enforcement and Proper Use of Signals.
A. Rules Enforcement.
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.

Sometimes, Team A plays "keep away." Here, I try to call the game as we've called it all night.

Sometimes, Team A gets the ball to the best FT shooter and waits for the foul. Here, I try to call the first contact.

I use common sense. A novel approach I guess. When the game is winding down and the trailing team calls time out, you can bet the coach isn't asking where the after-game party is going to be. That's when my partner(s) and I get together to make sure we are ready for this volatile time in the game. "Get the first foul, but make sure its a foul. Non calling official needs to ID the shooter right away but freeze and make sure no funny business is going on. Don't let the game get out of hand."

Interesting sitch last night on this.
 

Team A (home team) get a 1 point lead with 8 seconds to play. They have 5 team fouls. During the timeout, we get together and decide they will foul to keep team B from having a lot of time to setup a last shot. They come out of the timeout and two different players inform us that they will be fouling. I just said to make a play for the ball.

Team B takes the ball in, rushes to half court where team A is going to foul. Just as I at C am about to call the first contact for a foul, Team B's coach is asking for a timeout. So, may partner granted it as he was asking before the fould occurred. Bad move. Now there is only 5 seconds and team A still has a fould to give. Had he waited, he would have had the foul first.

Now, they inbound, team A fouls and there is 3 seconds left. They inbound, get a good look at a 3 pointer, but it misses.

Good game.

I'm just stirring the pot here, but if a player tells you they are going to foul, isn't that intentional? They are fouling to take away an opponents obvious advantageous position. Remember, I'm just stirring the pot here.

There are officials, including me depending on the tone of the game, that will make sure you get the first contact in a fouling situation because if you don't, the second will be harder and more dangerous. When my crew is in a situation like this, during a dead ball, we always talk about getting the first foul, but remembering that there has to be contact to be called.

Never throw away your old rule books. See POE #3B-from last years rulebook.

Nevada can cut'n'paste it for everybody sometime. :)

Can you give the gist of the rule for me since I don't have a rulebook?

If the timeout request happened first, then that's what should be called first. It's not a "bad" move. It's the "proper" move. Your job is to call the game as it happens, not manipulate it to make it move in a certain way. If you do this, then the players truly determine the outcome of the game and that is how it should be.

Pregame
 

From my "Long Version (Working With A Rookie)" Pregame:

Last Two Minutes
Near the end of the game, be aware of coaches calling time-outs and be sure to inform them after they have used all their time outs.
We’re not calling anything in the last two minutes if we haven’t already called it earlier in the game, unless it’s so blatant that it can’t be ignored. We don’t want our first illegal screen to be called with 30 seconds left in the game; but if the illegal screen puts a player into the first row of the bleachers, then we have to call it.
Let’s not put the whistles away in the last two minutes: That wouldn’t be consistent with the way we’ve been calling the game. If the game dictates it, let the players win or lose the game at the line. We don’t want to be the ones who decide the game by ignoring obvious fouls just to get the game over.
End of game strategic fouls: If the winning team is just holding the ball and is willing to take the free throws, then let’s call the foul immediately, so the ballhandler doesn’t get hit harder to draw a whistle. Let’s make sure there is a play on the ball by the defense. If there’s no play on the ball, if the defense grabs the jersey from behind, or if the ballhandler receives a bear hug, we should consider an intentional foul. These are not basketball plays and should be penalized as intentional.

For you?

No.

Am I the only one who sees a dichotomy here? In fact, I see two. :confused:

They sell them on EBay. Just got the 1960-61 book a few days ago. Once I get to the changes I will pass them along for you fiasco.

Wouldn't that be a bidichotomy?

B. Late in the game. Fouling is an accepted coaching strategy and is utilized by nearly all coaches in some form. It is viewed as a chance for a team behind in the score to get back in the game while the clock is stopped. There is widespread belief that it works or it wouldn't be coached.
There is a right way and a wrong way to foul. Coaches must instruct their players in the proper technique for strategic fouling. "Going for the ball" is a common phrase heard, but intentional fouls should still be called on players who go for the ball if it is not done properly. Conversely, a coach who yells, "Foul!" instructions to his or her team does not mean the ensuing foul is "automatically" an intentional foul – even though it is a strategic foul designed to stop the clock. Coaches, officials, players, fans and administrators must accept fouling as a legitimate coaching strategy.
With that, officials must have the courage to enforce the intentional foul rule. Far too often, officials do not whistle fouls as intentional when the act clearly meets the criteria. Officiating philosophies should not change because of the time remaining in the game or the score differential. The correct call should be made – not the popular one.

That's obvious from your posts. Maybe Old School could cut & paste it for you. No, wait, s/he doesn't own one either.:D

I don't see it. Are you saying there's a contradiction in saying that if we haven't called it in the first 30 minutes, or whatever, we're not calling something unless it's obvious to everybody?

This doesn't change whether you called it earlier in the game or not. If it's "obvious to everyone" that it's a foul, then hopefully you called it earlier in the game, and you'd still be consistent by calling it late in the game.

Thanks, Nevada.

But the converse is not true. We might call something that is NOT obvious to everyone earlier in the game, for a number of reasons. At the end of the game, though, if we haven't already called something throughout the whole game, then it better be obvious to everybody why we're calling it.

That's not really the point.

End of game fouls ARE obvious to everyone because the fouling player WANTS it to be obvious to everyone. So it gets called.

Rarely the case outside of the last minute or so of the game.

The point is that the situation may not have occured earlier in the game.

If something entirely new happens in the last 2 minutes, make sure it needs to be called before blowing the whistle.