Flagrant foul during the shot

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by jargo9

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

Doesn't have to add up. It's multiplication.

And yes, you have it correct.

[jargo9]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

I bet the link is to a parent website.

My kid is 1 year old so i have no ties to the call....other than having played and never been flagrant fouled on the shot

[Adam]

Originally Posted by jargo9

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)

So then you're encouraging the defender to foul sooner is all.

Submit a rule change suggestion granting an extra free throw for intentional fouls committed against players in the act of shooting.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by jargo9

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?

There is a difference between the dictionary definition of 'intentional' and the rulebook definition of 'intentional foul.' There are many times that fouls that are committed intentionally (think end of game needing to put someone on the line) are not called as intentional fouls (by rule).

Originally Posted by jargo9

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)

I understand that and can see your argument. I disagree, but that doesn't really matter in practice as neither of us make the rules. And the rule is clear on the penalty here.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by jargo9

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?

Maybe the Webster's definition, but not the NFHS definition.

[jargo9]

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?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by jargo9

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?

By rule, yes. Plus, due to the flagrant/intentional portion of the 2nd foul, A would get the ball at the spot nearest the foul.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by jargo9

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?

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.

[LocDog249]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

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.

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?

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by LocDog249

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?

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.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

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.

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?

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

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?

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.

[jargo9]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

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.

I agree with you JDW.

[GtuddaC]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

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.

Well, if in fact the rule is as you say it is, you ARE rewarding the team who committed the foul. The "intention" when committing an "intentional foul" comes from purposely fouling a player without employing a "basketball move". If this is the rule in place, what is there to stop a team from intentionally fouling on every possesion. If you dont want to call it "rewarding the offending team", you are ATLEAST penalizing the offended team for being in the act of shooting when the intentional foul was committed.

Also, under the rule as you say it is, the offending teams shot attempt should be waved off regardless of make/miss. They should only get the 2 technical fouls shots and the ball.

Otherwise, this entire rule is inappropriate. Entirely too much gray area.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by GtuddaC

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

The fact that the offended team receives two shots and possession of the ball.

This is a silly argument.