The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 01, 2010, 10:10pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 195
Dead ball contact--NFHS

Had this come up at our local meeting. Team A has a sideline throw in. BEFORE the official hands the ball to thrower A1, B2 strikes A3 with an elbow in A3's chest. Nothing flagrant, but he meant to do it. The calling official called an intentional. After looking it up in the book, it says this would be penalized with an "intentional technical". My question is, since the rule contains "intentional" does the offended player have to shoot? Or can anyone shoot? The book seems sort of contradictory and doesn't provide the definition/penalty of an "intentional technical". THanks!
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 01, 2010, 10:13pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 266
Quote:
Originally Posted by JS 20 View Post
Had this come up at our local meeting. Team A has a sideline throw in. BEFORE the official hands the ball to thrower A1, B2 strikes A3 with an elbow in A3's chest. Nothing flagrant, but he meant to do it. The calling official called an intentional. After looking it up in the book, it says this would be penalized with an "intentional technical". My question is, since the rule contains "intentional" does the offended player have to shoot? Or can anyone shoot? The book seems sort of contradictory and doesn't provide the definition/penalty of an "intentional technical". THanks!
Technical = any legal substitute

Personal = player fouled unless injured or instructed to leave

What was the basis for not being Flagrant?? Just curious.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 01, 2010, 10:13pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,841
Since it is a technical foul any member of the opposing team may attempt the FTs.

The determination of the shooter comes from personal versus technical, not intentional or flagrant.

Last edited by Nevadaref; Wed Dec 01, 2010 at 10:27pm.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 01, 2010, 10:25pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 195
Quote:
Originally Posted by CDurham View Post
Technical = any legal substitute

Personal = player fouled unless injured or instructed to leave

What was the basis for not being Flagrant?? Just curious.
I wasn't there. We discussed the play tonight at a training session. The official who called it said it wasn't worth ejecting the player. I rationalized that intentional=live ball action and you can't have an intentional foul during a dead ball. I thought you could only have a T or flagrant T during a dead ball. Then we got on the topic of this intentional technical and no one seemed to have a definitive answer.

Last edited by JS 20; Wed Dec 01, 2010 at 10:28pm.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 01, 2010, 10:29pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,841
Quote:
Originally Posted by JS 20 View Post
I wasn't there. We discussed the play tonight at a training session. The official who called it said it wasn't worth ejecting the player. I rationalized that intentional=common and you can't have a common foul during a dead ball. I thought you could only have a T or flagrant T during a dead ball. Then we got on the topic of this intentional technical and no one seemed to have a definitive answer.
Wow, they let those guys work HS games!

Here's your mistake: intentional does NOT equal common

Read these definitions from 4-19.

A foul is an infraction of the rules which is charged and is penalized.
ART. 1 . . . A personal foul is a player foul which involves illegal contact with
an opponent while the ball is live, which hinders an opponent from performing
normal defensive and offensive movements. A personal foul also includes contact
by or on an airborne shooter when the ball is dead.
NOTE: Contact after the ball has become dead is ignored unless it is ruled intentional or
flagrant or is committed by or on an airborne shooter.
ART. 2 . . . A common foul is a personal foul which is neither flagrant nor
intentional nor committed against a player trying or tapping for a field goal nor a
part of a double, simultaneous or multiple foul.
ART. 3 . . . An intentional foul is a personal or technical foul which neutralizes
an opponent's obvious advantageous position. Contact away from the ball or
when not making a legitimate attempt to play the ball or a player, specifically
designed to stop or keep the clock from starting, shall be intentional. Intentional
fouls may or may not be premeditated and are not based solely on the severity of
the act. A foul also shall be ruled intentional if while playing the ball a player
causes excessive contact with an opponent.
ART. 4 . . . A flagrant foul may be a personal or technical foul of a violent or
savage nature, or a technical noncontact foul which displays unacceptable
conduct. It may or may not be intentional. If personal, it involves, but is not
limited to violent contact such as: striking, kicking and kneeing. If technical, it
involves dead-ball contact or noncontact at any time which is extreme or
persistent, vulgar or abusive conduct. Fighting is a flagrant act.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 01, 2010, 10:30pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 266
Quote:
Originally Posted by JS 20 View Post
I wasn't there. We discussed the play tonight at a training session. The official who called it said it wasn't worth ejecting the player. I rationalized that intentional=live ball action and you can't have an intentional foul during a dead ball. I thought you could only have a T or flagrant T during a dead ball. Then we got on the topic of this intentional technical and no one seemed to have a definitive answer.
Yes can be Intentional or Flagrant for contact
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 01, 2010, 10:33pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,841
TECHNICAL FOUL
4.19.5 SITUATION: A1 is fouled by B1. A1 subsequently pushes B1. RULING: If
a foul is called on A1, it must be either an intentional or flagrant technical. If it is
ruled flagrant, A1 must be disqualified. If A1ís contact during a dead ball was neither
intentional nor flagrant, it should have been ignored. (4-19-1 Note; 10-3-8)
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 01, 2010, 10:33pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 266
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref View Post
Wow, they let those guys work HS games!

Here's your mistake: intentional does NOT equal common

Read these definitions from 4-19.

A foul is an infraction of the rules which is charged and is penalized.
ART. 1 . . . A personal foul is a player foul which involves illegal contact with
an opponent while the ball is live, which hinders an opponent from performing
normal defensive and offensive movements. A personal foul also includes contact
by or on an airborne shooter when the ball is dead.
NOTE: Contact after the ball has become dead is ignored unless it is ruled intentional or
flagrant or is committed by or on an airborne shooter.
ART. 2 . . . A common foul is a personal foul which is neither flagrant nor
intentional nor committed against a player trying or tapping for a field goal nor a
part of a double, simultaneous or multiple foul.
ART. 3 . . . An intentional foul is a personal or technical foul which neutralizes
an opponent's obvious advantageous position. Contact away from the ball or
when not making a legitimate attempt to play the ball or a player, specifically
designed to stop or keep the clock from starting, shall be intentional. Intentional
fouls may or may not be premeditated and are not based solely on the severity of
the act. A foul also shall be ruled intentional if while playing the ball a player
causes excessive contact with an opponent.
ART. 4 . . . A flagrant foul may be a personal or technical foul of a violent or
savage nature, or a technical noncontact foul which displays unacceptable
conduct. It may or may not be intentional. If personal, it involves, but is not
limited to violent contact such as: striking, kicking and kneeing. If technical, it
involves dead-ball contact or noncontact at any time which is extreme or
persistent, vulgar or abusive conduct. Fighting is a flagrant act.
Now I am not second guessing the official for his decision to go with Intentional because he was ultimately there during action. But with the description of the play I find it hard not to go with Flagrant if the elbow was swung and contacted the other player in the chest. Just my opinion
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Wed Dec 01, 2010, 10:43pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 195
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref View Post
TECHNICAL FOUL
4.19.5 SITUATION: A1 is fouled by B1. A1 subsequently pushes B1. RULING: If
a foul is called on A1, it must be either an intentional or flagrant technical. If it is
ruled flagrant, A1 must be disqualified. If A1ís contact during a dead ball was neither
intentional nor flagrant, it should have been ignored. (4-19-1 Note; 10-3-8)
So for the purposes of how it's penalized, a technical is a technical, regardless of whether or not it's an intentional technical. Two shots by any player of the offending team or a substitute and the ball at the division line. Correct?
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Thu Dec 02, 2010, 12:24am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,841
Quote:
Originally Posted by JS 20 View Post
So for the purposes of how it's penalized, a technical is a technical, regardless of whether or not it's an intentional technical. Two shots by any player of the offending team or a substitute and the ball at the division line. Correct?
Actually, at the NFHS level the offended team may have two different players attempt the FTs for any technical foul, but otherwise you are correct.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Thu Dec 02, 2010, 08:52am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 17,579
Quote:
Originally Posted by JS 20 View Post
I rationalized that intentional=live ball action and you can't have an intentional foul during a dead ball. I thought you could only have a T or flagrant T during a dead ball.
Your rationalization is wrong.

All fouls are either Personal (generally, live ball contact) or Technical (generally, dead-ball contact or non-contact).

The foul *might* have an adjective on the front -- common, Intentional , Flagrant, ...

Dead ball contact is ignored if it's not Intentional or Flagrant. So, there's no "common" Technical for contact.

Your play had dead ball contact that couldn't be ignored. So, it was a T. The calling official judged it to be non-flagrant. The only choice left is an Intentional Technical foul.

(and, in all of the above, I'm ignoring dead ball contact on or by an airborne shooter)
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Thu Dec 02, 2010, 09:47am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NE Ohio
Posts: 7,620
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins View Post
Your rationalization is wrong.

All fouls are either Personal (generally, live ball contact) or Technical (generally, dead-ball contact or non-contact).

The foul *might* have an adjective on the front -- common, Intentional , Flagrant, ...

Dead ball contact is ignored if it's not Intentional or Flagrant. So, there's no "common" Technical for contact.

Your play had dead ball contact that couldn't be ignored. So, it was a T. The calling official judged it to be non-flagrant. The only choice left is an Intentional Technical foul.

(and, in all of the above, I'm ignoring dead ball contact on or by an airborne shooter)
+1

Another way to think of it: we ignore dead ball contact unless intentional or flagrant. Excessive contact is one of two grounds for calling an intentional foul, which must be a T when the ball is dead (assuming no airborne shooter).
__________________
Cheers,
mb
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Thu Dec 02, 2010, 10:59am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: TX
Posts: 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins View Post
Your rationalization is wrong.

All fouls are either Personal (generally, live ball contact) or Technical (generally, dead-ball contact or non-contact).

The foul *might* have an adjective on the front -- common, Intentional , Flagrant, ...

Dead ball contact is ignored if it's not Intentional or Flagrant. So, there's no "common" Technical for contact.

Your play had dead ball contact that couldn't be ignored. So, it was a T. The calling official judged it to be non-flagrant. The only choice left is an Intentional Technical foul.

(and, in all of the above, I'm ignoring dead ball contact on or by an airborne shooter)
+1 Great Explanation Bob!
__________________
Da Official
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NCAA Dead Ball Contact Foul All_Heart Basketball 3 Mon Jan 25, 2010 10:28pm
NFHS dead ball shipwreck Softball 3 Mon Aug 28, 2006 08:24am
Dead Ball , Incidental Contact ? Chess Ref Basketball 15 Thu Dec 22, 2005 05:29am
Dead Ball contact missinglink Basketball 8 Wed Feb 18, 2004 11:33am
Dead Ball Award (NFHS) collinb Baseball 3 Wed Jul 16, 2003 04:48pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:50am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1