Is there a case for this sit?

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Corndog89

The OP doesn't necessarily address the intent of B1, but I agree there was no intent as described. However, what if B1 did push A2 with the clear intent to knock him into A1 to disrupt A1's shot? Would that not fit the criterion?

There are 2 ways for a foul to be an intentional foul, and the intent -- clear or otherwise -- of the fouler is not part of either one.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by mbyron

There are 2 ways for a foul to be an intentional foul, and the intent -- clear or otherwise -- of the fouler is not part of either one.

Disagree. Intent is clearly part of one of the two options...

"specifically DESIGNED to stop or keep the clock from running" (emphasis mine)

Something that is "designed" has intent.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Disagree. Intent is clearly part of one of the two options...

"specifically DESIGNED to stop or keep the clock from running" (emphasis mine)

Something that is "designed" has intent.

You misunderstand: many officials seem to think that an intentional foul should be called where the foul is "obviously intentional," as opposed to accidental. That's wrong, as you know, and that's what I'm trying to correct for the OP.

You've emphasized the wrong part of the definition above: it's not the mere fact of a design, but the content of it that makes the foul an INT. That is to say, we call an INT not just because the player intended to foul, but because of WHY he intended to foul.

I'm claiming that intent is not sufficient to call an intentional foul; you're arguing that (for one kind of INT) it's necessary. I don't deny that, though my earlier comment that intent is not "part" of intentional fouls is admittedly misleading.

[stosh]

For whatever it's worth, I did not see any intent to direct A2 into A1 on the part of B1. B1 was simply pushing through a screen (legally) set by A2 in an attempt to defend A1's shot, but in doing so, forced A2 into airborn shooter
A1, causing A1 to fall to the floor. The contact, IMO ,was not an Intentional Foul by definition.