Intentional or Not

[Toren]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

He did not get beat or even beat badly. This was a full court pass where the Lead would likely get dusted and he was with the play. Actually I would have liked him to stop and look at the play from around the block. Busting down would not have given him a better angle as the Center would have been able to see the side of the play where the initial contact took place. If anything the Center got beat on this play.

I agree it's a tough situation for the lead to not get beat on this play. But he did. Certainly not badly beat though. He gave one or two hard fast steps along the side initially but then slows down. Had he run that same way the whole time, he might have been able to "stop and receive" the play. I don't mind his angle here, wide is good here. I also think wide along the endline is best. But he never makes the endline.

But the more I look at the play, the Center definitely gets beat and even when there appears to be some escalation, he is walking toward the action. The lead in comparison did a fantastic job.

A double whistle here would have been better, but it appears the Center simply did not recognize the play in time or did not hustle to stay in position.

100%

His intent is not the issue; it is what he did to prevent that action. Like I said before I would like a closer angle to determine what the defender did with his arm as we cannot see how much of the ball or arm the defender made contact with.

Can you explain why you don't think intent is a part of an intentional foul situation?

Peace

Thanks for the feedback.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Toren

Can you explain why you don't think intent is a part of an intentional foul situation?

No where in the rule does the word "intent" come into play for why we do or why we do not call an intentional foul. We should only call a foul based on the action or in some cases the result. For example if excessive contact took place we can decide that was an intentional foul no matter if the player intended to foul the player or not.

Peace

[tref]

Originally Posted by Toren

Can you explain why you don't think intent is a part of an intentional foul situation?

In addition to what JRut said, it is not part of our jobs to make decisions as to what players are thinking or intending to do.
The part of the rule that says, intentional fouls may or may not be premeditated... tells us that intent has nothing to do with assessing intentional fouls.

Im sure you threw up the X in a game just to hear the player/coach say, "he didn't try to knock him down."

NCAA-M is eliminating the intentional foul & going to flagrant 1 & 2 this season for this very reason:

Eliminate the use of an intentional foul and replace it with “Flagrant 1”. Flagrant 1 will carry a penalty of two shots and the ball; Flagrant 2 will be two shots, the ball and ejection of the offender.

Rationale: To remove the concept of intent from these rules.