Intentional or Not

[APG]

You throwing up the X or not?

[Camron Rust]

I'm OK with the intentional.

If he had made the same swipe and not held on to drag him down, probably not.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I'm OK with the intentional. If he had made the same swipe and not held on to drag him down, probably not.

Agree. From my side of the court, it looked like the defender "hooked" the ball handler across the upper arm, and dragged him down.

AllPurposeGamer: Can you get us the video from the hot single Mom with the camera on the other side of the court?

[JRutledge]

I could be OK with either call. Without seeing a better angle I cannot say the IF was bad and I can see why nothing more was called but a common foul.

Peace

[Brick43]

Slo mo is going to ruin my career. Full speed I have no intentional. It looks like he made a play at the ball and attempted to hold up the player. Then slo-mo it looks worse and I change my mind. I wonder what other decisions in my life I would reconsider if I slowed down the tape? Where's that wedding footage.....?

[APG]

Originally Posted by Brick43

Slo mo is going to ruin my career. Full speed I have no intentional. It looks like he made a play at the ball and attempted to hold up the player. Then slo-mo it looks worse and I change my mind. I wonder what other decisions in my life I would reconsider if I slowed down the tape? Where's that wedding footage.....?

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

[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.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Brick43

Slo mo is going to ruin my career. Full speed I have no intentional. It looks like he made a play at the ball and attempted to hold up the player. Then slo-mo it looks worse and I change my mind. I wonder what other decisions in my life I would reconsider if I slowed down the tape? Where's that wedding footage.....?

Use it for what it is worth. Players will make contact in this game and sometimes will look like this. I would just need to see clearer what the other arm was doing and I would feel more confident calling an IF.

Peace

[just another ref]

I see this as a play which matches the first line of the definition of an IF.

"personal.......foul which neutralizes an opponent's obvious advantageous position."

The swipe at the ball was an afterthought after the mugging.


As I describe this kind of play to myself: He had no chance to do anything but foul................and he knew it.

[NCHSAA]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

You throwing up the X or not?

This is a tough angle. That is probably why the C offered his judgement as he closed down since the L had a common foul. The angle from C could have been better since contact was on that side.

[Toren]

I'm relatively new to the refereeing field. The biggest thing that stand out to me: the lead official got beat on this play, and the reason being he slows up at the end, he could have easily have been three or four steps in better position than he was. He may not have been in perfect position to receive the play, but he definitely could have been in better position. This is the type of play you bust your butt hard the whole way, but he didn't, he slowed down.

Secondly, the opposite side official, I'm going to assume this is three man and call him the slot, doesn't enter the shot until the foul is called and the lead is now separating personnel. I'm not sure what kind of angle or assistance he could have possibly given.

I didn't like those two things about the coverage. With that said, intentional all the way. The defender had no intent other than there was not going to be a dunk on his team.

[BLydic]

Originally Posted by Toren

I'm relatively new to the refereeing field. The biggest thing that stand out to me: the lead official got beat on this play, and the reason being he slows up at the end, he could have easily have been three or four steps in better position than he was. He may not have been in perfect position to receive the play, but he definitely could have been in better position. This is the type of play you bust your butt hard the whole way, but he didn't, he slowed down.

Secondly, the opposite side official, I'm going to assume this is three man and call him the slot, doesn't enter the shot until the foul is called and the lead is now separating personnel. I'm not sure what kind of angle or assistance he could have possibly given.

I didn't like those two things about the coverage. With that said, intentional all the way. The defender had no intent other than there was not going to be a dunk on his team.

There's a time when you're going to get beat, no matter how much busting you do. So if he slowed down to maintain a look through versus over running the play, he may have seen all that was necessary. Except for possibly that left hand grabbing jersey, which has been previously mentioned.

I agree with your assessment of the center official. Too far away IMO to offer credible assistance on the IF upgrade, but I would listen.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Toren

I'm relatively new to the refereeing field. The biggest thing that stand out to me: the lead official got beat on this play, and the reason being he slows up at the end, he could have easily have been three or four steps in better position than he was. He may not have been in perfect position to receive the play, but he definitely could have been in better position. This is the type of play you bust your butt hard the whole way, but he didn't, he slowed down.

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.

Originally Posted by Toren

Secondly, the opposite side official, I'm going to assume this is three man and call him the slot, doesn't enter the shot until the foul is called and the lead is now separating personnel. I'm not sure what kind of angle or assistance he could have possibly given.

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.

Originally Posted by Toren

I didn't like those two things about the coverage. With that said, intentional all the way. The defender had no intent other than there was not going to be a dunk on his team.

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.

Peace

[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