Inbounding - foul?

[deecee]

Another illogical thing about fouls by the players with the ball is that if he uses his arm to push the defender back why is that certainly NOT intentional? It would appear that if the defender shoves the offensive player we call that Intentional but if reversed we only call a common foul? Seems unfair dont you think?

[Juulie Downs]

Originally Posted by deecee

Seems unfair dont you think?

Last time I checked, "seems unfair" wasn't a criterion in deciding what to call intentional and what not to.

Book clearly states that if the defender reaches across and contact is made, it's intentional. No such rule is made about A1 making contact anywhere. So if defender is reaching across, even if A1 initiates contact, seems to me it's an intentional on defender, unless there's a DOG call prior to the contact. If A1 reaches inbounds to make contact, rules don't specify intentional, foul must be common (can't be PC because no TC). That's by the rules, and what "seems fair" to me doesn't much matter.

[WIRef]

Juulie-
I would tend to agree with all you said, other than the point about being an intentional on the defender, when he reached thru the plane, but A1 initiated the contact. If you are going to go by book rule, logic says that there would have been a plane violation before any contact was made. In a case of the defender making the contact, the plane warning is over-ruled by the intentional foul. I am not sure that would be the same case with A1 initiating contact on the OOB side.

[Juulie Downs]

Originally Posted by WIRef

Juulie-
I would tend to agree with all you said, other than the point about being an intentional on the defender, when he reached thru the plane, but A1 initiated the contact. If you are going to go by book rule, logic says that there would have been a plane violation before any contact was made. In a case of the defender making the contact, the plane warning is over-ruled by the intentional foul. I am not sure that would be the same case with A1 initiating contact on the OOB side.

Yea, I guess it would be largely a matter of perception. The physics of the thing would mean that the violation would HAVE to happen before the contact (if it happens oob). So the foul might be seen as always being initiated by the defender. The ball-handler wouldn't have time to initiate contact before the violation happened.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by deecee

Another illogical thing about fouls by the players with the ball is that if he uses his arm to push the defender back why is that certainly NOT intentional? It would appear that if the defender shoves the offensive player we call that Intentional but if reversed we only call a common foul? Seems unfair dont you think?

You want fair? Call Judge Judy. Since when is "fairness" a criteria for the rules?