Btaylor, you couldn't be more wrong.

1. The bear hug is a classic intentional foul.
2. I'm okay with calling a quick foul here, if the offense is letting it happen. If, however, the offense is actually playing and trying to avoid the foul, make the defense commit an actual foul. Don't reward them for sloppy play.
3. Advantageous position would be the player going for an uncontested layup who gets pushed from behind. Or a kic about to break free when he gets held by the defender behind him.

Why does your definition of foul change in this situation? If you call a foul for "any amount of contact", aren't you directly contradicting 4-27-1? Aren't you penalizing the offense by allowing the defense to accomplish what they want (stopping the clock), without doing what they need to do, by rule, to stop the clock?

Remember, he is a pro-am guy with that rule set mentality.
They don't even have an intentional foul in the book - if you are fouling a player with the ball.

If a team wants to foul, I am going to give it right away, too. Consider it preventive. The first attempt will be polite, the fourth will be the defender putting the opponent through the floor.

I don't see the bear hug as automatically intentional. If a player reaches around like that and gets just the ball, it's a held ball. Who am I to say (I know, I know) that the defender isn't reaching around for the ball?

Mostly, people should call how it's called in their area. It takes a lot to get an intentional at the end of the game in most places I've lived and this is not one place I would want to be known for being different.

While I understand what you're saying, I'm still not sure we should call things differently at this part of the game. I know the team is trying to foul, so I will be looking closely. Yes, I certainly understand the team can get frustrated if they miss the first couple of attempts, and that usually leads to harder attempts. But I've also called the intentional in this very situation, and the coach wasn't happy - with his players. I'm still in the camp where incidental contact and contact deemed to be a foul is the same at the beginning of the game as it is at the end. Why should I penalize the offense if the defense isn't quick enough to get there to foul "properly"? Didn't the offense do their job, so to speak, and build up the lead at that point in the game? Aren't they doing their job, so to speak, keeping the ball away from the team that's behind? Why should I penalize them by stopping the clock and calling slight contact that I would easily pass on early in the game?

Again, I will be watching closely; I don't want to miss contact that would otherwise normally be called.

I actually agree with this.

I agree as well.

I recently heard Mr. Rush, Sr. & Mr. Clougherty discuss "take" situations.

According to those two extremely knowledgeable sources, the team behind is taking a foul in the end of game situation.

"Put your hand on 'em & it's a foul."

"You have to know TIME, SCORE & FOULS ."

"You have to know if a team is taking a foul... end of game situation I'm behind by 2 & you have the ball with less than 5 seconds is a take situation."

"You have to have your anttena up & be mentally ready."

Apparently the amount of contact that constitutes a foul does change from the beginning to the end of a game.

This is really helpful. :rolleyes:

Call it both ways.

It's 8 to 2. EIGHT! to TWO!

M&M
I think what you're saying is correct - too many people mistake first foul for first contact.
You ahve to make the contact be foul, if not you are doing a disservice to the team with the ball. They are trying to move the ball quickly to avoid being fouled and keep the clock running. If you just blow the whistle on some little contact you are penalizing them for doing the right thing just as you are giving an advantage to the team fouling if you do not make them foul.
No body said let them kill each other but make them foul the palyer and if they do it too hard call it the way it needs to be called. call what you have been calling all game - just be quick about it!

The reality here would be that the defense starts to increase the intensity of the fouls. Now you have an increased chance for an intentional and/or flagrant. What has been told to me by officials from the HS to D1 to NBA level is that in these situation err on the side of caution. Because what I have seen happen is perfectly good officials judgment called into questions because they followed advice that was similar to what is being said in this thread. If it is remotley close that a team is playing keep away and the other team is trying to foul, contact by the team trying to foul, especially on the ball handler, will be called quickly. Even moreso if the defense warns me that they will be going for a foul. However if the team playing keep away is getting the ball out of their hands quick enough then the contact is either incidental or intentional or flagrant, but not common.

I always remember an end of the game situation where we were behind, and fouling "on purpose". My guy fouled a kid two or three times, no call, then out of frustration, pushed the kid. Intentional foul. Thanks, ref!

Due to an end of game situation a few years back, I called a foul [on the *Stud*] that didn't need to be called. It was his 5th, and he didn't want it.
Since then, I only call real fouls.

Bingo

Per NBA/NCAA Big dogs:

"You have to know TIME, SCORE & FOULS ."

"You have to have your antenna up & be mentally ready."

http://www.gpboa.org/Articles/Watching%20Works.pdf

The author is a friend of mine.