Wanted to hear about everybody's comments and opinions on the intentional foul in the Georgia NCAA tournament game, not too long ago. Also, there is an article talking about this on officiating.com talking about the game.

I for one, thought there was a chuck/impede across the lane on the defensive player. The play was allowed to "play through" for whatever reason and as a result, the defensive player pushed him across the floor and into the bench. At this point, the foul escalated into an intentional foul, when it was called. I believe if the calling official, would have called the off ball chucking/impeding in the lane area as the offensive player is attempting to cut to the ball, this whole intentional foul scenario could have been avoided.

Any thoughts?

Off ball contact coming through the lane. Would this be called in the 1st half? I saw the contact you were talking about. Would it have been fair to call this type of foul, in this situation, sending a poor FT shooter to the line, when they havn't called this type foul the whole game. I thought the official handled it correctly. The player has to be smarter or he does not deserve to win. BTY, even if it would have been called a common foul, Georgia still had a long shoot to win.

I am not too concerned about whether Georgia still had a shot to win the game.
I firmly believe that the foul in the lane area is exactly what the NCAA and supervisors around the country want called. Regardless of score and/or time of the game that is a guideline post play foul in the lane area. I would say that the player should be smarter and play better defense so he doesn't foul the player, unless that is what he was told to do. Because the foul wasn't called immediately in the lane area the play progressed out toward the 3 point line and into the bench resulting in an intentional foul. There is no question that the foul was intentional when it progressed this far. However, if it was called earlier, as per the post play guidelines and points of emphasis on rough play for the NCAA, the intentional foul would never had occurred.

If my memory serves me, the chuck/impede you are talking about was STILL away from the play, which in that circumstance would call for an intentional foul as well.
I think the officials were giving Georgia a chance to foul
legitimately, but in abscence of a legit foul, had no other choice but to call the intentional.
Especially when another Georgia player POINTS IT OUT to the
official!:rolleyes:

Surely, you are not saying that a chuck/impede away from the ball calls for an intentional foul? I would hate to think that because it is the last seconds of a ball game that any foul away from the ball would automatically deemed intentional, we would be making hefty assumptions on intent instead of calling what we see, I believe. I still think it was a good call in the Georgia game, though.

"I would hate to think that because it is the last seconds of a ball game that any foul away from the ball would automatically deemed intentional"

Huh??????????:confused:

What other purpose?intent does a foul away from the play/ball,
serve than to stop the clock,prevent an imbounds pass from being completed etc? Both of thoses meet the criteria for
calling an intentional foul. For me it's not hard to discern.
If you want to foul at the end of a game, foul the player with the ball.

Ok, so I can't set a screen to get my teammate open because there is less than x amount of time left in the game?? Ridiculous.

Not what I'm talking about.
You setting a screen to get a teammate open is not the same a defender fouling an offensive man away from the ball!
:mad::p

Drake is absolutely right.
Intentional Fouls are fouls away from the play. Look at the NF rules and I'm sure you will see this.

The purpose behind this rule is to stop a player from fouling the worst free-throw shooter (aka something like Shaq) while the guard has the ball or the big guy is completely out of the play. Of course determining if the foul is away from the play is all judgement.

How many times in a NF game is a person passing the ball, the ball is away and a team wants to stop the clock so they lunge at the guy who has thrown the ball to the opposite side of the court... Getting way close if not an intentional

was this play on a throw in or during running clock?

After the ball had been inbounded. Running clock.
I believe under 10 seconds in the game.

I was thinking it was after a rebound. It makes no difference, after rebound, after throw in.

The play occurred with less than 30 seconds to play.
Georgia players were chasing the ball, trying to foul.
The Georgia bench was screaming "Foul! Foul!"
The Goeorgia player pushed the player from the center of the lane, into the bench.
The ball was near the center circle.
There was no effort being made by the fouled player to "get open."

What Drake is saying, and I concur with him, is that this foul was an effort, off the ball, to stop the clock. With all the information included above, how could it not be an intentinal foul?

I think Mike Wood made the proper call.

What Drake is saying as paraphrased by you, Tony is not at all what Drake said in this post which is what I tried to make a minor point about, not start WWIII about the call in the Georgia game. The call was an absolute great call, though pretty cut and dried and I believe most of us would have made the same call. I do not, however, think you can blanket all calls away from the ball as intentional. That is what I believe Drake implied in this post. I do not think that is exactly what he meant and expected him to say as much. I will grant you that grabbing a player off ball in order to have a foul called to stop the clock is obviously intentional and should be called as such. That does not mean that all contact away from the ball is either intentional or incidental whether during the last seconds of the game or the first, that was my point.

First, my reply was not meant as a response to your post. Second, I don't think your interpetation of what he wrote is what he was saying at all. JMO