I was only going by what you stated:

If you would've said: "It's not an intentional foul because it doesn't meet the criteria of 4-19-3", I can live with that. But that isn't what you stated.

While I'm not necessarily arguing for the intentional call, I can see where it might be considered. Let's put it in a slightly different context: let's say green #12 is the ball handler and driving to the basket, and white #54 is the defender; with the exact same contact - would you still consider the contact, "certainly not much and certainly not enough to warrant an intentional"?

I can't even see why you would consider this as intentional. It literally never entered into my mind until I read it further down in the thread.

IMHO calling this play an intentional foul would be a text book example of bad Game Management.

In your other situation I would have to see it, but I would certainly lead toward a common foul.

Cool. Can you give me the page number in that text book where it says that?

Again, I'm not specifically arguing for the intentional call, I'm just saying that the reasons for calling or not calling it should be based on what the rule states is an intentional foul, not based on "game management". If you tell me it's not an intentional based on the fact it wasn't intended to stop the clock, or it wasn't neutralizing an obvious advantageous position, then I can accept those points because those deal directly with the rules. However, each time you have argued against the intentional foul call, your point is it would only be "bad game management". That's a lousy reason to make or not make a call.

Now, in my example of green #12 now being the ball handler, I might consider this contact to be excessive and warrant the intentional call (due to 4-19-3), hence the feeling some might have about the same call on the screen. I don't feel it warrants an intentional call because the standards are a little different between contact on a ball handler and contact away from the ball.

We both get to the same conclusion, but it appears you're taking a different route to get there ("game management" vs. rules-based). That route could get you in trouble if you follow it in other instances.

That is the beauty of game management, it isn't in the rule book. I think everyone would agree that the best officials in the game are those who exhibit outstanding game management skills.

Getting to this particular play, from a game management sense. What if the player that got laid out was the leading scorer and now can't play.... we have no call.... Now the coach from the team B ends up getting run and we have a retaliation situation from Team B and have to throw her.... All because we probably needed a whistle on that one play. We can go back to this play as the flashpoint that started the whole debacle.

My point is, that if someone gets laid out on a questionable screen. Everyone in the gym sees it. Don't split hairs on the A1 vs. B1 play. Referee with common sense. If you have a foul on this play and we look on the film and see maybe it was wrong.... I guarantee, nobody (fans, coaches, observers etc) will say squat during the game. There is a reason why rough play has been a point of emphasis since 1987.... no-calls on plays like this.

As always, my goal is to encourage the members of this board to think outside the box.

I've got an intentional flagrant - attempt to injure. She's outta here so quickly that I'd even have someone go start the shower for her.

And I completely disagree with your particular philosophy also.

Who gives a damn if the foul is on a star instead of an ordinary player? We're not working in the freaking NBA. Worrying about whether a star player is involved or not is as ridiculous as worrying about what a coach thinks about the call. And why should we also ever give a damn whether everybody in the whole gym saw it? Everybody in the whole gym...<b>except for the officials</b>....wants the call to be made in favor of their team. They could care less whether the call was <b>right</b> or not.

The only criteria needed to make the call is whether the block was legally set or not. If the player got laid out on screen that was legal, that's just too bad.

Nothing that you or mu4scott are talking about has got diddly-squat to do with game management in any way, shape or form imo. It's got everything to do with trying to avoid making a tough but correct call. Game management isn't involved in any way in this particular call. It's simply a matter of deciding whether the block was legal or not. If you think that the block was illegal, you just call the foul.

Sorry, but that's my opinion.

That's what you have on this play?

Calling this play properly has nothing to do with game management. It is really disappointing that people start using philosophies they clearly do not understand. This was a hard foul within the game of basketball. It was only a foul at the last millisecond before contact. If the screener just stood there, then no foul.

Game management situations are so the game does not get out of hand. The best example I can think of you have two players in the post grabbing and holding, you decide you are going to call fouls to clean it up. In other words you call fouls you might have allowed or that cannot be ignored because the players have raised up the intensity. This screen was just a hard screen. It took place because no one warned the defender there was a screen. The legality of the screen had little or nothing to do with game management. This is a play that would likely not happen again unless someone does not warn someone for another screen.

Peace

You said it yourself " Game management situations are so the game does not get out of hand." Watch the coach in the video and tell me that situation isn't heading south......

Using the scenario in the post that you described, game management is used to cease behaviors that lead to rough play, which you refer to as "cleaning it up."

If you don't think this particulair play (no call) could lead to a "situation getting out of hand" I feel sorry for you. Hard screen, player injured, tie ball game, second half = Sack up and call the damn foul or you are going to have a cluster @#$% for the next 13:00 minutes. You can't let it go and I challenge you to find any top D1 official who would think that's ok. The reason they would not think so is because your Game Management just went down the toilet.

No. I just wanted to see what you'd say. My call is in post #21.

And you're still missing the point. You can have a hard screen, player injured, tie game, second half.....and if the screen was legal, you have to sack up and no-call it, without worrying about what the coaches, fans, etc. think.

You make the call based <b>ONLY</b> on the legality of the screen. Game management has got absolutely <b>NOTHING</b> to do in any way with making the call. Nada! Zip! Zero!

Even if it was a legal screen? Would it be good game management to call a foul because someone gets injured?

I was the original poster of this video so here's my two cents. Although the quality of the video is poor, it appears to me that the screener was not fully set prior to contact and was shifting her body to the left into the other player. If I was the official and saw this, I would have called a blocking foul.

And no, I would not have called it intentional.

Dang it, I'm typing slow today.