2 FTs and the ball?

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Once again, this brings up the issue of going to the NBA rule on flagrant 1 and flagrant 2 instead of using the term "intentional" for a flagrant foul that just wasn't quite flagrant enough to warrant an ejection. It just seems to make so much more sense to me to have that be the rule.

I guess that's the reason the NF doesn't do it.

It's the word "intentional" that really confuses everyone. I HATE that usage. The rest isn't so bad. Just change the vocabulary.