Originally Posted by jargo9 (Post 659993)

It was a elbow to the head and then B1 then taunted A1.

Let me understand this....if an intentional foul is committed away from the ball you get
:2 shots + the ball

Intentional foul is committed during the shot and the basket is good you get
:basket + 2 shots + the ball

Intentional foul is committed during the shot and the basket is missed and you get
:2 shots and the ball

Something does not add up here

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett (Post 660012)

I bet the link is to a parent website. :p

Originally Posted by jargo9 (Post 660016)

I guess all i am saying is if an intentional/flagrant foul is commited during the non-shooting act the offensive team should not receive the same reward as during the shot(my opinion)

Originally Posted by jargo9 (Post 660016)

Not to split hairs here but you said "unless the player knows he's going to foul intentionally " wouldnt by definition the word INTENTIONAL cover him knowing he was going to commit a foul of this nature?

Originally Posted by jargo9 (Post 660016)

I guess all i am saying is if an intentional/flagrant foul is commited during the non-shooting act the offensive team should not receive the same reward as during the shot(my opinion)

Originally Posted by jargo9 (Post 660016)

Not to split hairs here but you said "unless the player knows he's going to foul intentionally " wouldnt by definition the word INTENTIONAL cover him knowing he was going to commit a foul of this nature?

Originally Posted by jargo9 (Post 660044)

Another flagrant foul question for this debacle....

Lets say A1 was fouled(personal) by B1 during the shot but during the shot
A2 was flagrant/intentional foul by B2.....Wouldnt both A1 and A2 both receive 2 free throws each?

Originally Posted by jargo9 (Post 660044)

Another flagrant foul question for this debacle....

Lets say A1 was fouled(personal) by B1 during the shot but during the shot
A2 was flagrant/intentional foul by B2.....Wouldnt both A1 and A2 both receive 2 free throws each?

Originally Posted by jdw3018 (Post 660047)

The exception would be if the officials get together and determine that the intentional/flagrant action occurred prior to A1 beginning his shooting motion. In that case, the foul on A1 would be ignored as the ball was dead.

Originally Posted by LocDog249 (Post 660055)

Just for fun, lets take it one step further.... A1 jumps, releases shot, B2 intentionally fouls A2, B1 fouls A1, A1 lands after attempt. (Yes, A1 has AMAZING hang time). Now what do you have?

Originally Posted by jdw3018 (Post 660062)

Same thing as in the OP. The ball isn't dead until A1 returns to the ground.

Edited to add: And A1 doesn't have to release the ball for it to work this way - just needs to have started his habitual motion. At any point after that, the foul by B2 doesn't cause the ball to become dead and A1 can be fouled in the act of shooting at any point until he returns to the ground.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 660068)

Here's the kicker. False multiple, we all get that.
Since you penalize in order, the intentional gets penalized first, followed by the shooting foul.

Line 'em up when you shoot? Or clear the lane? :D

Originally Posted by jdw3018 (Post 660087)

Oh, snap. That is the fun part. I'll have to go get my books.

Before I do, I'll say penalize in order - shoot the FTs for the intentional, then put everyone on the lane and shoot the throws for the shooting foul.

Originally Posted by jdw3018 (Post 660009)

Whatever you found online is simply not accurate.

And I don't see the logic behind the "reward"...unless the player knows he's going to foul intentionally and therefore fouls harder to prevent the basket. If the player is already processing that he's going to foul intentionally, he's probably going to do what he can to prevent the make anyway.

Intentional fouls carry the additional penalty of rewarding the offended team the ball. It's already more severe than a common foul. If the player adds enough "extra" to an intentional foul it can be deemed flagrant, which carries the same on-court penalties plus disqualifies the offending player.

By your logic (rewarding an additional 2 shots if the try is unsuccessful) we should also add one additional shot if the try is successful (one for the 'and 1' and two for the intentional foul).

The rule is pretty clear, and I've never seen an incident that would make me re-think its appropriateness.

Originally Posted by GtuddaC (Post 660091)

If this is the rule in place, what is there to stop a team from intentionally fouling on every possesion.