Intentional or Not

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Slow motion tends to have that effect...making incidents appear worse than they really were.

Agree. In football we say that slo-mo makes everything look like a foul.

I also agree that this is an intentional foul. Easy call, even in real time.

[bowlingref]

If you let that go, then the next one will only be worse. The IF gets the players attention.

[twocentsworth]

per the criteria the John Adams provided at the NCAA-M level....yep - intentional.

[tref]

Originally Posted by twocentsworth

per the criteria the John Adams provided at the NCAA-M level....yep - intentional.

Flagrant 1 this season.

[ref2coach]

"OH MY, Thats a TERRIBLE CALL," by the announcers

I agree with those focusing on the "first line" of the IF rule. IF from me.

[bob jenkins]

I refuse to answer the poll question because both given answers are correct.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I refuse to answer the poll question because both given answers are correct.

Leave it up to Bob to come up with a play where you can actually "call it both ways".

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I refuse to answer the poll question because both given answers are correct.

it's an intentional foul and it's a personal foul. it's not a common foul.

[ontheway]

I was taught by My HS V coach that when he says "dont let them score" that means if you have to torch his house, you stop the basket. In his own words " if your gonna foul MAKE SURE HE Misses HIS SHOT" I personally have done the exact play in question. My point is this; you guys are all X'ing him for mugging( which ive done) but you make it sound like him " dragging him down" was an act of malice or that he was violent. watch the video he helps him up and smacks his rear. Theres no "Chesting up" and NOt even an inkling of a potential fight. him holding onto the guy was prolly an act of kindness

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by ontheway

I was taught by My HS V coach that when he says "dont let them score" that means if you have to torch his house, you stop the basket. In his own words " if your gonna foul MAKE SURE HE Misses HIS SHOT" I personally have done the exact play in question. My point is this; you guys are all X'ing him for mugging( which ive done) but you make it sound like him " dragging him down" was an act of malice or that he was violent. watch the video he helps him up and smacks his rear. Theres no "Chesting up" and NOt even an inkling of a potential fight. him holding onto the guy was prolly an act of kindness

This is an accepted practice in professional basketball, but not in amateur athletics.

The simple phrase "neutralize an opponent's obvious advantageous position" was created for this exact type of non-play on the ball. This phrase was included because the rules-makers do not want this type of defence in basketball. Period. If you don't like it, get yourself onto the rules committee and petition for a change. Until, you'll have to set your personal opinion aside (most of us have some rule that we don't like) and call the play correctly with an X.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

This is an accepted practice in professional basketball, but not in amateur athletics.

The simple phrase "neutralize an opponent's obvious advantageous position" was created for this exact type of non-play on the ball. This phrase was included because the rules-makers do not want this type of defence in basketball. Period. If you don't like it, get yourself onto the rules committee and petition for a change. Until, you'll have to set your personal opinion aside (most of us have some rule that we don't like) and call the play correctly with an X.

I agree, but I read his post as a rejection of the idea that this might be a flagrant foul. My impression is that most players know that grabbing the opponent and "not playing the ball" is an intentional foul, even if they don't know the exact rules language.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by mbyron

I agree, but I read his post as a rejection of the idea that this might be a flagrant foul. My impression is that most players know that grabbing the opponent and "not playing the ball" is an intentional foul, even if they don't know the exact rules language.

I guess. But the only post that I saw mentioned a flagrant is an F-1 in a non-existant game. So why the need to convince us that it's not a flagrant? We already all pretty much agree that it isn't a flagrant foul.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

This is an accepted practice in professional basketball, but not in amateur athletics.

The simple phrase "neutralize an opponent's obvious advantageous position" was created for this exact type of non-play on the ball. This phrase was included because the rules-makers do not want this type of defence in basketball. Period. If you don't like it, get yourself onto the rules committee and petition for a change. Until, you'll have to set your personal opinion aside (most of us have some rule that we don't like) and call the play correctly with an X.

Says who? You cannot take a line in the rule and say that it applies to your personal position either. I have never read anywhere that suggests you cannot foul someone and prevent a score. If that is the case any foul going to the basket would be considered an intentional foul and those are still rare situations.

Peace

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Says who? You cannot take a line in the rule and say that it applies to your personal position either. I have never read anywhere that suggests you cannot foul someone and prevent a score. If that is the case any foul going to the basket would be considered an intentional foul and those are still rare situations.

Peace

Good grief.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

Good grief.

Exactly. You could not answer the question but giving a personal opinion about what is accepted. Guess you have never seen a player do everything to block or stop a breakaway without violating the rules. Oh well.

Peace