Intentional Fouls

[drinkeii]

Originally posted by eroe39
But please don't the call the intentional foul just because you think a team if fouling to stop the clock. Call intentional fouls when a guy gets pushed to the floor or when a guy gets a hard shot from behind on a breakaway layup. Now, a point was brought up about a player fouling a person without the ball in a rec game to stop the clock. I would totally agree that this should be an intentional foul because then the worst shooter can be picked out and fouled even when the are not involved in the play at all. In the NBA/WNBA we have a rule called away-from-the-play foul which handles this situations. I'm ready BasketballRef, I am sure you are ready to blast me once again. That's good though, I like that.

But again, here we go with not following the rule. There is almost a passing reference to too much force being used being considered an intentional foul, when it is clearly stated that the intentional foul is for a clock-stopping foul. When the coach and players are telling them to foul, and they do so, this is one of the situations that is covered to be called as an intentional. To say that we aren't supposed to call the intentional foul because we think someone is trying to stop the clock is completely contradictory to the rules. Another quote:

Every team in America will foul to stop the clock when they are down towards the end of the game. Why penalize them extra for doing this?

Because this is exactly what the rule is designed for. EXACTLY - it is the first line in the rule...

"An intentional foul is a personal or technical foul 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."

We're starting to veer away from the text of the rule and into the "well, this is just what they do, so we should let them do it" - it's not an extra penalty for a strategic move... it is a strategic move that is not allowed by the rules and carries an extra penalty. Since we are there to see that the rules are followed, we really don't have the right to say "Gee, I don't think they SHOULD be penalized extra for that" - The rules say they do, and so they do! You make a choice to foul intentionally to stop the clock, and tell your players to do so "FOUL FOUL FOUL!!!!", or tell the ref you're going to, or foul away from the ball, or make no reasonable attempt at the ball, and that carries an additional penalty.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by eroe39
I'm ready BasketballRef, I am sure you are ready to blast me once again. That's good though, I like that.

Well, I don't recall blasting you previously. If you'll be more concerned with the content of what's posted, you'll see that you and I are on the same page with this.

BTW, if you're an NBDL and an WNBA official, why are you just now learning that those associations don't have an intentional foul?

[Larks]

Originally posted by drinkeii

According to the NFHS rulebook, page 30, "An intentional foul is a personal or technical foul 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)

Anyone read this as they want us to call ANY foul made by the losing team on the ball handler intentional if it occurs in the later stages of the game?

Can anyone clearly define later stages?

Why give that kind of advantage to the team in the lead? Look at the phrase "may or may not be premeditated". Someone above made the commment aboud "mind reading". I missed that section during class!

I'd like to see comments on when a foul is designed to stop the clock vs. when a foul is designed to steal the ball or block the shot.

While we are at it....here's another example: Winning team A3 catches a pass down in the post and during a shot attempt, is fouled by B2 late in the 4th. Everyone in the gym knows that A3 was fouled because late in the game, if you're going to have to give up points, he may as well earn them. Intentional? Ever hear the phase "No Easy Baskets"?

So, I'm back to this...if the defender is going for the ball or going to block the shot late in a game....who here calls intentional? Bear hugs, off the ball holds, a two handed shove, a tackle, a fore arm shiver, etc. in my mind are intentional. A guy fouling in the act of attempting a steal which coincidentally stops the clock isnt.

At least IMHRO (In My Humble Rookie Opinion)

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by eroe39
But please don't the call the intentional foul just because you think a team if fouling to stop the clock. Call intentional fouls when a guy gets pushed to the floor or when a guy gets a hard shot from behind on a breakaway layup.

In the points of emphasis last year, there was a discussion of this, where it referred to the "strategic" foul. This is NOT an intention foul and should not be called as such. The difference is that the strategic foul is a legitimate attempt on the ball, and probably mostly looks like any other foul throughout the game -- an overzealous block, or a reach that doesn't work right, or such.

The "intentional" foul has the purpose of manipulating the rules rather than just overplaying. I've called intentional fouls early in the game that weren't very "excessive". The dribbler had inside position, and the defender was keeping up, but had no chance to legally stop the lay-up, so she reached across and whacked the non-dribbling arm of the dribbler. It was clearly a foul to take away the obvious advantage, and had no other purpose, although it was not late in the game and the defender's team was ahead. I called it intentional and the coach went -- well, I wont go into THAT -- but by rule I was right.

What I wish they would do is change the word "intentional" On a play that is excessive contact, the word intentional is kind of offensive, because usually the fouler is not hurting the other player "intentionally" but just being sloppy or unskilled. As a parent, I used to get my feathers ruffled when my daughteer or one of her teammates got called for intentional. It wasn't on purpose (except at the end of the game), they were just too rough.

On the other hand, I'm not sure how many HS refs could handle yet another category of foul. And I;'m pretty sure how many parents and fans could understand it...

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Larks
I'd like to see comments on when a foul is designed to stop the clock vs. when a foul is designed to steal the ball or block the shot.

Here's how I judge it:

Suppose there is a certain defensive maneuver that results in a steal 10% of the time, and a foul 90% of the time. (In this hypothetical situation, no other results are possible.)

If a player uses this maneuver in the first quarter, the coach will probably pull the player. But, in the last minute of the game, with the team behind by 3 points, it might be the best play. It's not an intentional foul.

[Hawks Coach]

Originally posted by bob jenkins


If a player uses this maneuver in the first quarter, the coach will probably pull the player. But, in the last minute of the game, with the team behind by 3 points, it might be the best play. It's not an intentional foul.

With my teams, if I have a player that only does this once in a quarter I am playing her the whole game

[secondyear]

At the end of the game when the team that is behind in points is trying to stop the clock, would you consider a player lowering his shoulder, without a play on the ball, and running into the dribbler an intentional foul? From my angle, I felt it was intentional all the way and received a raised eyebrow from the veteran official I was working with when I called the intentional foul. Without seeing the play, any thoughts from the board?

[Rookie]

I had this exact situation last night. Team A has the ball and Team B is pressing...ball gets to half court and a struggle for a loose ball occurs. Player B1 bear hugs A1 (who ended up with the ball) and drags him to the ground, I called an intentional, mainly becuase he brought A1 to the ground.

Thoughts, commments?

[Larks]

Originally posted by Rookie
I had this exact situation last night. Team A has the ball and Team B is pressing...ball gets to half court and a struggle for a loose ball occurs. Player B1 bear hugs A1 (who ended up with the ball) and drags him to the ground, I called an intentional, mainly becuase he brought A1 to the ground.

Thoughts, commments?

IMHRO (In My Humble Rookie Opinion)....

Lowering shoulder, bear hugs, off ball holds, two handed shoves....all intentional....going for the ball with a reach or hammering a shooter to help them earn it is an awfully tough intentional.

[Hawks Coach]

Originally posted by secondyear
At the end of the game when the team that is behind in points is trying to stop the clock, would you consider a player lowering his shoulder, without a play on the ball, and running into the dribbler an intentional foul? From my angle, I felt it was intentional all the way and received a raised eyebrow from the veteran official I was working with when I called the intentional foul. Without seeing the play, any thoughts from the board?

If you are talking about a football block without trying in any way to extend a hand toward the ball - absolutely you can call the intentional to protect the dribbler. If you are saying that there was a hand extended like they were playing the ball and it could slightly remotely possibly be a play on the ball but it was unlikely to be successful, I think you have a common foul. You know they had no realistic play, but I wouldn't go fishing for anything more than a common foul unless it is a real attempt to flatten a player or an excessively hard foul.

[eroe39]

Originally posted by BktBallRef

Well, I don't recall blasting you previously. If you'll be more concerned with the content of what's posted, you'll see that you and I are on the same page with this.

BTW, if you're an NBDL and an WNBA official, why are you just now learning that those associations don't have an intentional foul?

BasketballRef, certainly I am aware that the NBDL and WNBA have no intentional fouls and have no that for quite some time. The reference I made was to FIBA not having intentional fouls. I was not aware of this until yesterday when I read it on a post. First time I have used a quote, I hope it works out OK.

[Oz Referee]

The main thing I am hearing here is that just because a fouls is designed to stop the clock - it shouldn't be called an intentional (although the rules say otherwise).

Here is the exact wording of the Unsportsmanlike rule (FIBA):

Art. 46 Unsportsmanlike foul
46.1 Definition
46.1.1 An unsportsmanlike foul is a personal foul committed by a player which, in the judgement of the official, is not a legitimate attempt to directly play the ball within the spirit and intent of the rules.
46.1.2 Unsportsmanlike fouls must be interpreted consistently throughout the whole game.
46.1.3 The official must judge only the action.
46.1.4 To judge whether a foul is unsportsmanlike, the officials should apply the following principles:
• If a player is making no effort to play the ball and contact occurs, it is an unsportsmanlike foul.
• If a player, in an effort to play the ball, causes excessive contact (hard foul), then the contact shall be judged to be unsportsmanlike.
• If a player holds, hits, kicks or deliberately pushes an opposing player, it is an unsportsmanlike foul.
• If a player commits a foul whilst making a legitimate effort to play the ball (normal basketball play), it is not an unsportsmanlike foul.
46.1.5 A player who repeatedly commits unsportsmanlike fouls must be disqualified.
(Emphasis added)

You can see that this makes no mention of fouling to stop the clock, and actually emphasises that these fouls must be called consistently throught the game.

Now I have found this quite difficult to adjust to after calling obvious clock stopping fouls at the end of the game as "intentional". But I do believe it is better for the game.

As an aside, this change of rules makes it almost impossible to penalise a coach/team when the coach is screaming "Foul,foul,foul" in the dying part of the game - although you can still call a Tech foul on the coach for unsportsmanlike conduct (actively encouraging his/her players to break the rules).

Could this be one of the few occasions where you non-FIBA referees may actually prefer the FIBA rule? What is the process for getting rules in NFHS changed, and would you like to see this rule changed?

[Larks]

Originally posted by Oz Referee
As an aside, this change of rules makes it almost impossible to penalise a coach/team when the coach is screaming "Foul,foul,foul" in the dying part of the game - although you can still call a Tech foul on the coach for unsportsmanlike conduct (actively encouraging his/her players to break the rules).

Anyone here ever call an intentional foul on a player after fouling because everyone on the (losing) bench is yelling "FOUL!" I havent encountered this sitch yet so I'm courious if anyone doing NFHS has called it like this.

Signed: The Latest Rook, Larks

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by eroe39
BTW, if you're an NBDL and an WNBA official, why are you just now learning that those associations don't have an intentional foul?

BasketballRef, certainly I am aware that the NBDL and WNBA have no intentional fouls and have no that for quite some time. The reference I made was to FIBA not having intentional fouls. I was not aware of this until yesterday when I read it on a post. First time I have used a quote, I hope it works out OK. [/B][/QUOTE]

Thanks for clarifying. The way it was written...well, I guess I just read it incorrectly.

Congrats on the quote!

[drinkeii]

Originally posted by bob jenkins

Here's how I judge it:

Suppose there is a certain defensive maneuver that results in a steal 10% of the time, and a foul 90% of the time. (In this hypothetical situation, no other results are possible.)

If a player uses this maneuver in the first quarter, the coach will probably pull the player. But, in the last minute of the game, with the team behind by 3 points, it might be the best play. It's not an intentional foul.

Well, if they are going for the ball, then that is a legit play by my reading of the rules. So it wouolnd't be intentional. I don't have a problem with people fouling when playing the game. The reading of that rule on intentionals is that it is a foul to do something whose purpose is to stop the clock - if all you do is foul with no attempt at the ball, that is a clock-stopping thing late in the game, therefore it is intentional. If it could reasonably be expected to get the ball (10% isn't reasonable, in my book!!) - then it is a common.