I think interesting question

[81artmonk]

I just want to know your thoughts. At the end of a game when a team is down by a point or two they will be coached to foul a player in order to get them to the line and have a chance at the missed shot and rebound to get back into the game.
I am aware that any attempt to foul without going for the ball is by the rules considered intentional and is subject to two shots and the ball. In my 40 years of playing ball and a little of coaching, I have never had ANY ref ever call that. Until last week. Here's my situation. I have about 50% of the refs that call our games that state to me they would never make that call. They would consider that a simple foul and depending on the violations, would reward the ball out of bounds or to make shots, but wouldn't call it intentional. They know the rule, but don't call it.
What are your thoughts on games where refs, one game will call certain things, and other refs won't even if it is a rule?? Just my two cents worth, I think it's unfair. One week we get penalized for it and it costs us the game and the next week the oppossing team gets rewarded for doing it becuase the ref doesn't call it? If it's a rule it should be called.

[deecee]

in instances where I know a team is going to foul I make sure I mention to the team/coach to make a play on the ball -- in an event where its a lower level game and they go for the foul and its borderline intentional i remind them that if that happens again it will be. never had a problem and I have called several intentionals in this instance for grabbing jersey, shove in the back type of stuff. only a couple coaches complained and moaned but there is no real argument there -- especially after i mentioned to make a play on the ball.

but for the first foul i am a bit more lenient with the intentional -- it all depends on the severity and what the kid did to get the foul.

[Ignats75]

If the player makes a play on the ball or to stop a try, its not intentional, its a normal defensive play.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by 81artmonk

I just want to know your thoughts. At the end of a game when a team is down by a point or two they will be coached to foul a player in order to get them to the line and have a chance at the missed shot and rebound to get back into the game.
I am aware that any attempt to foul without going for the ball is by the rules considered intentional and is subject to two shots and the ball. In my 40 years of playing ball and a little of coaching, I have never had ANY ref ever call that. Until last week. Here's my situation. I have about 50% of the refs that call our games that state to me they would never make that call. They would consider that a simple foul and depending on the violations, would reward the ball out of bounds or to make shots, but wouldn't call it intentional. They know the rule, but don't call it.
What are your thoughts on games where refs, one game will call certain things, and other refs won't even if it is a rule?? Just my two cents worth, I think it's unfair. One week we get penalized for it and it costs us the game and the next week the oppossing team gets rewarded for doing it becuase the ref doesn't call it? If it's a rule it should be called.

The "problem" is that it's a judgment call, and different officials will have different judgment. In addition, the judgment is affected by the specific game and it's extremely unlikely that the exact same play happend in the different games.

[mick]

2005-06 Points of Emphasis


3. Intentional Fouls. The committee is concerned about how games end. The intentional foul rule has devolved into misapplication and personal interpretations. The committee has revised the rule to improve understanding. An intentional foul is a personal or technical foul that neutralizes an opponent's obvious advantageous position. Contact away from the ball or when not making a legitimate attempt to play the ball, specifically designed to stop or keep the clock from starting, shall be intentional. Intentional fouls may or may not be premeditated and are not based on the severity of the act. A foul also shall be ruled intentional if while playing the ball a player causes excessive contact with an opponent.

A. Anytime in the game. Acts that neutralize an opponent's obvious advantageous position and must be deemed intentional include:
• Excessive contact on any player attempting a shot
• Grabbing or shoving a player from behind when an easy basket may be scored
• Grabbing and holding a player from behind or away from the ball
These are "non-basketball" plays and must be considered intentional fouls anytime they occur during a game.

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.


2006-07 Basketball Points of Emphasis


4. Intentional Fouls
The committee continues to be concerned about how games end. While there has been some improvement in the application of the rule, there is still need for further understanding and enforcement. An intentional foul is a personal or technical foul that neutralizes an opponent's obvious advantageous position. Contact away from the ball or when not making a legitimate attempt to play the ball or player, specifically designed to stop or keep the clock from starting, shall be intentional. Intentional fouls may or may not be premeditated and are not based solely on the severity of the act. A foul also shall be ruled intentional if while playing the ball a player causes excessive contact with an opponent.

Fouling is an accepted coaching strategy late in the game. 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.

Additionally, in throw-in situations, fouling a player that is not involved in the play in any way (setting a screen, attempting to receive the in-bound pass, etc.) must be deemed intentional. Far too often, officials do not call fouls as intentional when the act clearly meets the criteria.

[jkjenning]

Originally Posted by 81artmonk

... any attempt to foul without going for the ball is by the rules considered intentional and is subject to two shots and the ball. In my 40 years of playing ball and a little of coaching, I have never had ANY ref ever call that. Until last week.

It should be called, I call it and ignore the complaints from the coach which inevitably come. All you can do is make sure your players do 'go for the ball'. Also, if you feel that it is an issue which is working against you, call a timeout to discuss it with the officials - that's all you can do during the game.

Of course, there can be some subjectivity to determining whether or not a foul was a play on the ball and you are not an objective participant in the game!

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by mick

•
•
•

Mick - this looks metric to me. Are you sure you aren't quoting FEEBLE rules?

[81artmonk]

I wasn't asking your thoughts on the rule, but the situation where refs aren't consistant in calling the rules, where one says he would call it, and another says he wouldn't.

[BLydic]

Originally Posted by 81artmonk

... I have never had ANY ref ever call that. Until last week.

If it's a rule it should be called.

Do you want it called or not?

Did you read the post about judgement?

Maybe your players shouldn't put you in that position at the end of the game. Maybe all those missed shots, missed free throws and turnovers that your players are committing wouldn't cost you the game.

Just a thought.

[Ref in PA]

Originally Posted by 81artmonk

I wasn't asking your thoughts on the rule, but the situation where refs aren't consistant in calling the rules, where one says he would call it, and another says he wouldn't.

What do you expect us to say?

Golly Gee, it is a darn shame all refs don't call the same. We are sooo sorry to all the coaches and little kids who lose games because the refs are different week to week. Send us their names and we will take care of it.

In the perfect world all refs would judge the same week in and week out. All refs would know the rules. All refs would never miss a call. Guess what? Life isn't fair - deal with it. Teach you kids and parents to deal with it. Do your best under all circumstances. There is not much we can do about it. The ones here on this board seem to be trying to improve their game, becoming the best ref possible.

[canuckref]

I have called intentional fouls repeatedly late in games. Some examples: two hand push in ball handlers back in the bc, out and out tackles, holding a jersey, grabbing an arm and yanking. I am surprised how few coaches prepare for this type of play, but madly call for players to foul anyone, anyhow. I am also quick to call a legitimate play on ball that gets a solid block, hold, push foul. We don't need the real silly dramatic foul to happen, everyone gets crazy and it leads to increased chance of player injury late in a game.

[mick]

Originally Posted by 81artmonk

I wasn't asking your thoughts on the rule, but the situation where refs aren't consistant in calling the rules, where one says he would call it, and another says he wouldn't.

Now, 81artmonk, ...you've been around here long enough to know which of this forum's members will follow the rules and which members will make something up.
The one's that call it use the term "game management".
The ones that won't call it use the term "game management".
...And all will call it judgement.

[mick]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Mick - this looks metric to me. Are you sure you aren't quoting FEEBLE rules?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by mick

Now, 81artmonk, ...you've been around here long enough to know which of this forum's members will follow the rules and which members will make something up.
The one's that call it use the term "game management".
The ones that won't call it use the term "game management".
...And all will call it judgement.

You are wise beyond your years......

Unfortunately, it's true, it's true.....

[mplagrow]

Originally Posted by 81artmonk

I wasn't asking your thoughts on the rule, but the situation where refs aren't consistant in calling the rules, where one says he would call it, and another says he wouldn't.

On even numbered days, I call intentionals. On odd numbered days I don't. Except Thursdays, then the inverse is true.