What'cha got on this?

Adam · #1 (**permalink**) Thu Dec 17, 2009, 02:50pm

If the basket misses, it only matters in the first scenario, with the coach being of the defensive team. In that case, the shooter gets three shots instead of two.

Since the shot wasn't taken, technically, in the 2nd scenario, it doesn't matter. The "shooter's" team still gets two free throws for the technical foul. The player technical in the 2nd scenario would simply be intentional, IMO.

Also, another difference in the two scenarios: offensive coach means it's an intentional technical (or flagrant technical if you desire), because the ball is dead. Defensive coach means it's a personal foul, which means the fouled player has to take the FTs (but means he will either get the 3 points or an additional FT). The inbounds spot is also affected.

representing · #2 (**permalink**) Thu Dec 17, 2009, 03:00pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Also, another difference in the two scenarios: offensive coach means it's an intentional technical (or flagrant technical if you desire), because the ball is dead. Defensive coach means it's a personal foul, which means the fouled player has to take the FTs (but means he will either get the 3 points or an additional FT). The inbounds spot is also affected.

Take a look a the realtime part of the video (before replay is shown). You can see, if you look quick enough, that right after giving the T with both hands, the referee looks and sees an intentional or flagrant foul and goes to give the signal for intentional/flagrant foul just before it cuts to the replay. I definitely going with at least an intentional whether it was the offensive or defensive coach. No reason for that kind of force that defensive player had on the shooter.

Other than that, I do agree with you on the rest. Thanks for your insights Snaqwells!

jdw3018 · #3 (**permalink**) Thu Dec 17, 2009, 03:05pm

Snaqwells is saying it's an intentional either way - but whether it's an intentional personal or intentional technical depends on which coach the technical foul was called.

representing · #4 (**permalink**) Thu Dec 17, 2009, 03:12pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdw3018

Snaqwells is saying it's an intentional either way - but whether it's an intentional personal or intentional technical depends on which coach the technical foul was called.

oh ok, I misread what Snaqwells wrote. My bad.

Adam · #5 (**permalink**) Thu Dec 17, 2009, 03:16pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by representing

Take a look a the realtime part of the video (before replay is shown). You can see, if you look quick enough, that right after giving the T with both hands, the referee looks and sees an intentional or flagrant foul and goes to give the signal for intentional/flagrant foul just before it cuts to the replay. I definitely going with at least an intentional whether it was the offensive or defensive coach. No reason for that kind of force that defensive player had on the shooter.

Other than that, I do agree with you on the rest. Thanks for your insights Snaqwells!

First of all, that is not the signal for a flagrant foul, it's the signal for an intentional foul which would work regardless. Secondly, this is such an uncommon situation that I wouldn't take the official's preliminary signals as any indicator either what was actually ruled or what should have been ruled. This scenario is bound to momentarily screw up anyone's mechanics.

Yes, taking away the coach T, this foul is an easy intentional (due to excessive contact), which is why I said it should be ruled as such even if the coach is the coach of team B (the defender). If he's Coach B, the ball is live until the shot goes in or misses; that's why the foul is personal rather than technical. If he's Coach A (offense), the ball is dead immediately, making the player foul a technical.

representing · #6 (**permalink**) Thu Dec 17, 2009, 03:24pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

First of all, that is not the signal for a flagrant foul, it's the signal for an intentional foul which would work regardless. Secondly, this is such an uncommon situation that I wouldn't take the official's preliminary signals as any indicator either what was actually ruled or what should have been ruled. This scenario is bound to momentarily screw up anyone's mechanics.

Yes, taking away the coach T, this foul is an easy intentional (due to excessive contact), which is why I said it should be ruled as such even if the coach is the coach of team B (the defender). If he's Coach B, the ball is live until the shot goes in or misses; that's why the foul is personal rather than technical. If he's Coach A (offense), the ball is dead immediately, making the player foul a technical.

I just looked in the book. There is no signal labeled as flagrant foul. But at our chapter we were told that the flagrant foul signal is the same as the intentional foul signal. Since there's no official signal for flagrant foul, what would you do signal-wise?

Adam · #7 (**permalink**) Thu Dec 17, 2009, 03:27pm

I've seen the intentional signal used. I don't use a signal. You're going to need to go to the table to report it anyway, and actually tell the coach. A signal isn't really necessary, IMO.

Personally, I wouldn't use the X because it's not an intentional foul. I don't use the baseball "heave ho" signal, because there's no need to escalate emotions. It's a call best delivered cold, IMO. YMMV, however.

representing · #8 (**permalink**) Thu Dec 17, 2009, 03:31pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I've seen the intentional signal used. I don't use a signal. You're going to need to go to the table to report it anyway, and actually tell the coach. A signal isn't really necessary, IMO.

Personally, I wouldn't use the X because it's not an intentional foul. I don't use the baseball "heave ho" signal, because there's no need to escalate emotions. It's a call best delivered cold, IMO. YMMV, however.

YMMV?

and yes, it actually would be better to deliver it cold to the coach rather than stir up the whole gym to hate you even more.