Penalties for intentional personal foul (Federation)

[JeffTheRef]

I'm looking for the simplest possible expression of the penalties for intentional personal fouls (High School Federation variety). Is this it?

1. In all cases, the offended team gets the ball at the spot of the foul.

1. Not shooting, 2 shots

2. Shooting, try is no good:
1. If a 2-point try, 2 shots
2. If a 3-point try, 3 shots

3. Shooting, try is good
1. 1 shot for either case, 2 or 3 point shot

[JRutledge]

You are always going to at least shoot two FTs on all Intentional Fouls. No matter if the ball goes in or not.

Peace

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by JeffTheRef
I'm looking for the simplest possible expression of the penalties for intentional personal fouls (High School Federation variety). Is this it?

1. In all cases, the offended team gets the ball at the spot of the foul.

1. Not shooting, 2 shots

2. Shooting, try is no good:
1. If a 2-point try, 2 shots
2. If a 3-point try, 3 shots

3. Shooting, try is good
1. 1 shot for either case, 2 or 3 point shot

I can't find my book at the moment, but I think it's two shots for any intentional foul, except an unsuccessful 3-point shot, which is three.

[JeffTheRef]

1. In all cases, the offended team gets the ball at the spot of the foul.

1. Not shooting, 2 shots

2. Shooting, try is no good:
1. If a 2-point try, 2 shots
2. If a 3-point try, 3 shots

3. Shooting, try is good
1. 2 shot for either case, 2 or 3 point shot

Yes?

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by JeffTheRef
1. In all cases, the offended team gets the ball at the spot of the foul.

1. Not shooting, 2 shots

2. Shooting, try is no good:
1. If a 2-point try, 2 shots
2. If a 3-point try, 3 shots

3. Shooting, try is good
1. 2 shot for either case, 2 or 3 point shot

Yes?

I think you've got it. My sentence is shorter, though!

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by JeffTheRef
1. In all cases, the offended team gets the ball at the spot of the foul.

1. Not shooting, 2 shots

2. Shooting, try is no good:
1. If a 2-point try, 2 shots
2. If a 3-point try, 3 shots

3. Shooting, try is good
1. 2 shot for either case, 2 or 3 point shot

Yes?

Jeff,
You now have the correct summary. If you did this because you think that the page which summarizes the penalties for all fouls in the back of the rules book is confusing, I agree. Nice job taking the time to make this rule clear to yourself and some others.
PS I did have an intentional foul on a made lay-up last year, so you may need it someday. And yes, we still awarded two shots.

[JeffTheRef]

I have been awarding 2 shots, and I call plenty of intentional fouls. Pushing a player who's in the air from behind, I'll call that every time. I used to do it. I know how well it works . . .

I have half re-written the rulebook - not changed the rules - in an effort to make it easier for the new officials I use to get up to speed. Of course applying the rules remains . . . challenging.

[DownTownTonyBrown]

I think the text is poor and the table does a slightly better job of clarifying - however, not extremely well. I also have NOT found Rulebook 'text' that says two shots for intentional foul committed during a successful try. The casebook play 4.19.3A, definitely spells it out and the table kind of spells it out... indirectly... by inference:

Summary of Penalties for All Fouls

#2 One free throw if fouled in the act of shooting and two- or three-point try or tap is successful. Doesn't specifically say anything about intentional foul.

#4 Two free throws if intentional or flagrant, plus ball for throw-in (By inference, this one must include the successful try because nothing else in the table disucsses both successful try and intentional foul).

#5 Fouled in the act of shooting and try or tap is unsuccessful

• a. Two free throws on two-point try or tap
  b. Three freethrows on three-point try or tap
  Plus ball for throw-in if intentional or flagrant.

#6 Multiple foul: ...
Plus ball for throw-in if intentional or flagrant. WHO HAS EVER CALLED ONE OF THESE??!

Thanks, Jeff for making the extra effort to help our fellow officials.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by JeffTheRef
I have half re-written the rulebook - not changed the rules - in an effort to make it easier for the new officials I use to get up to speed. Of course applying the rules remains . . . challenging.

I'm intrigued by this. I wonder if there is a way we could examine your efforts and make suggestions... and possibly start putting the results to good use. I agree that there are a number of parts of the rule book that are very difficult to interpret or understand, and so many play situations are sort of spread out through various parts of the book, which makes it a very confusing document.

Would you be willing to get some input and give some output for us? Now that the season is over, it would give us some bball to think about.

[JeffTheRef]

EOM! The message has to have a body . . .