AAAaaarrrrrrggggggghhhhhhh!!

[Mark Dexter]

I apparently "decided a game" earlier tonight. At least, that's what my partner said - the teams didn't complain about the call.

About 10 seconds left in game, A-21 B-23. B is bringing the ball up from their backcourt, and A2 fouls B1 going after the ball. There was a little bit of contact, and I was about to call a common foul when A2 then "bear hugs" B1. I call the intentional, which is worth an automatic 2 points to B in this league.

Best part, partner talked to me after the game saying that that might be an intentional at the beginning of the game, but not at the end !!! I just shrugged it off because he didn't say anything loud enough for the teams to hear.

How do you deal with partners like this?

[BktBallRef]

I'll address the call. If there was enough contact to call a foul, then that's the foul. Don't change your mind based on what happens after the initial foul, unless you have a situation where intentional excessive contact occurs.

BTW, there's no proof in any of this that you decided the game. Learn and move on.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally posted by BktBallRef
I'll address the call. If there was enough contact to call a foul, then that's the foul. Don't change your mind based on what happens after the initial foul, unless you have a situation where intentional excessive contact occurs.

BTW, there's no proof in any of this that you decided the game. Learn and move on.

This was intentional excessive contact, in my opinion. I simply thought it could not be ignored in the given situation.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by Mark Dexter

This was intentional excessive contact, in my opinion. I simply thought it could not be ignored in the given situation.

Hmmm. Okay, but I've never seen a bear hug that appeared to be excessive contact. Did he throw him to the floor? What, about the contact, was excessive?

[williebfree]

Originally posted by Mark Dexter
I apparently "decided a game" earlier tonight. At least, that's what my partner said - the teams didn't complain about the call.

Best part, partner talked to me after the game saying that that might be an intentional at the beginning of the game, but not at the end !!! I just shrugged it off because he didn't say anything loud enough for the teams to hear.

How do you deal with partners like this?

Unethical official, not a prudent choice, by your "partner" to make comments that could be heard by teams, coaches, and fans.

Then I ask.... What happened to consistency throughout the game?

[eroe39]

Mark, it's hard for me to reply without seeing the play, but obviously in a 2 point game with 10 seconds left you want to try to stay away from an intentional foul unless it is obvious that the foul was way too rough. A bear hug does not seem to me a foul that is excessive unless it is on a break away to stop a layup. A foul to me that is excessive is if a player is pushed to the floor or hacked in the face or undercut on a break away layup. A bear hug does not hurt a player fouled but is simply a way the defense tries to bring attention to the official that he wants a foul call. Again, I would have to see the play though so you might of been right to make the intentional foul call. As far as the way your partner handled the situation he should of obviously waited until you two were alone to talk about the play and should not of made the comment that you decided the game.

[drinkeii]

Originally posted by eroe39
Mark, it's hard for me to reply without seeing the play, but obviously in a 2 point game with 10 seconds left you want to try to stay away from an intentional foul unless it is obvious that the foul was way too rough. A bear hug does not seem to me a foul that is excessive unless it is on a break away to stop a layup. A foul to me that is excessive is if a player is pushed to the floor or hacked in the face or undercut on a break away layup. A bear hug does not hurt a player fouled but is simply a way the defense tries to bring attention to the official that he wants a foul call. Again, I would have to see the play though so you might of been right to make the intentional foul call. As far as the way your partner handled the situation he should of obviously waited until you two were alone to talk about the play and should not of made the comment that you decided the game.

According to the NFHS rulebook, page 30, "An intentional foul is a personal or technical foiul designed to stop or keep the clock from starting, to neutralize an opponent's obvious advantageous position, contact away from the ball when not playing the ball. It may or may not be premeditated and is NOT based on the severity of the act." (emphasis added by me)

From the NFHS Simplified and Illustrated (last year's edition), Page 9, "Acts that MUST be deemed intentional may include: 1) grabbing a player from behind; 2) wrapping the arms around a player; 3)grabbing a player away from the ball; 4) grabbing or shoving a player from behind when an easy basket may be scored;..." (no more relevant to this discussion, and emphasis on MUST added by me)

Reading these two items, it would appear that the bear hug, whether or not excessive, is definitely defined by the rules as intentional. I have found in the games that I have done, there is a very strong apprehension about referees calling intentional fouls. They never seem to want to do it, and even when I have had situations during the game (most occur later in the game, but some do occur throughout) that warrant it according to the rules, most of the time they don't call it, or if I ask my partner, they say "that wasn't intentional".

I do understand the concept of calling the game fairly throughout. That is important.

But I don't understand why many refs, even though the rules say one thing, they choose to ignore it. They seem to feel that the late game fouling to stop the clock, which is specifically defined in the rules as not allowed (not the late game part, but the fouling to stop the clock), is a part of the game and should be allowed. It seems to me that this isn't really a judgement call, but more of a "I don't like that rule, so I'm not going to enforce or call it." This doesn't seem like something that is supposed to be our purvue - we make judgements about plays, according to the rules, and make our calls based on that (and a little common sense... but common sense shoulnd't override a hard and fast rule) - you can't play a game without rules.

I'm expecting a firestorm after this one, because I have always been a by-the-book ref. Blast shield up!

[BktBallRef]

No firestorm, from me. But read what he posted. "There was a little bit of contact, and I was about to call a common foul when A2 then "bear hugs" B1." In these situations, we know a team is going to foul. At the first sign of contact, the foul should be called. By not calling the first foul, we allow things like a bear hug, a jersey pull, or a shove from behind to occur. I can only base my opinion on what Mark stated and that was that he saw a common foul, but then blew the intentional foul. Without regards to the stupid comment his partner made, that's the wrong call.

[Edited by BktBallRef on Dec 10th, 2001 at 10:40 AM]

[Hawks Coach]

As a coach, I agree with BktBallRef. While the second foul clearly meets the intentional criteria, the second only occurred because the first did not get called. About to whistle is the first problem - ball was dead. Even if you didn't tweet it quickly enough, there was a common foul on A2 that you were in the process of calling when the bear hug happened. Now tell that you have a technical foul on A2 for the bear hug after the first foul and I am really going nuts!

End of game, refs need to watch the tendency to wait for a solid foul to blow the whistle. If you know they are going to need a foul, you better be prepared when the first contact happens, because you are going to get a steady escalation in contact if you don't hit the first one. That's when players get hurt, teams begin to get chippy with each other, etc. Call the first foul immediately and avoid the escalation that is bound to occur if you wave off on the first contact.

[devdog69]

I think I was one of the first ones to view this stich, and was about to comment on it before everyone else but decided to wait and see what happened. My first instinct was to zoom in on the "I was about to call a common foul, but" part and say when you blew your whistle you did so because of a common foul not and intentional. Stay with the original call and go on. So, I guess I am in agreement with Tony, which is always the right place to be, but I have to say "I had it first". Lol.

[drinkeii]

I guess I wasn't looking that that so much as the question of "intentional" or not - what if there was no delay, and the bear hug happened immediately?

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by drinkeii
I guess I wasn't looking that that so much as the question of "intentional" or not - what if there was no delay, and the bear hug happened immediately?

If there's a bear hug, I don't think you have any choice. I would just rather be looking for a reason to not call an intentional, than looking for a reason to call one.

[drinkeii]

Originally posted by BktBallRef

If there's a bear hug, I don't think you have any choice. I would just rather be looking for a reason to not call an intentional, than looking for a reason to call one.

This is what I was asking about in my really long post earlier - why does everyone look to avoid calling an intentional foul whenever possible, instead of just calling the game the way that the rules are written?

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by drinkeii

This is what I was asking about in my really long post earlier - why does everyone look to avoid calling an intentional foul whenever possible, instead of just calling the game the way that the rules are written?

By trying to avoid calling an intentional whenever possible, I believe I'm calling by the spirit and intetn of the rules. If it's there, fine. But I'm not going to look for reasons to call it.