Intentional or not?
 

A1 has fast break for a layup. B1catches up just enough to put a hand in his back in the middle of the shot. He was obviously beat and contact was unecessary. A1 made the basket and wasn't knocked to the floor. Thoughts? No call, intentional, pushing foul for a +1?

Honestly have no idea based on the description. You need a little more than putting hands on someone to call a foul. The shooter being displaced would have more to do with what I would call.

Peace

Did he change A1's trajectory?

If a call is made there, the expected call will be an INT.

He gave him just a little nudge. Nothing excessive. Do you let players get away with such nonsense?

Again, this is not about letting anyone get away with anything. The contact has to affect the player. An attempt at something is not the same as a foul in this case. This is why I asked the question, because simply touching a player is not a foul. There has to be some displacement, movement, stopping or directing a player. Honestly I am sure I call more intentional fouls than anyone here and never care what others think about it when I do call them or the point of the game. But your description is not conclusive and your answer is even more inconclusive.

Peace

A little nudge in the back of an airborne shooter may not be excessive, but it damned sure is unneccesary. INT

That makes it sound, to me, as if you already have your mind made up.

Yep.

Peace

If the displacement is slight, I'll call the shooting foul and talk to the player.

If there's no displacement, no call.

If it's significant, an INT is likely the best option.

I know, I know, its two different codes!! But as I always say the higher the level of play, the better the books are written.

HS
An intentional foul is a personal or technical foul that may or may not be premeditated and is not based solely on the severity of the act. Intentional fouls include, but are not limited to:
a. Contact that neutralizes an opponent's obvious advantageous position.
b. Contact away from the ball with an opponent who is clearly not involved with a play.
c. Contact that is not a legitimate attempt to play the ball/player specifically designed to stop the clock or keep it from starting.
d. Excessive contact with an opponent while playing the ball.e. Contact with a thrower-in as in 9-2-10 Penalty 4.


NCAA
A flagrant 1 personal foul shall be a personal foul that is deemed excessive in nature and/or unnecessary, but not based solely on the severity of the act. Examples include, but are not limited to:
1. Causing excessive contact with an opponent while playing the ball;
2. Contact that is not a legitimate attempt to play the ball or player,
specifically designed to stop or keep the clock from starting;
3. Pushing or holding a player from behind to prevent a score;
4. Fouling a player clearly away from the ball who is not directly
involved with the play, specifically designed to stop or keep the clock
from starting; and
5. Contact with a player making a throw-in. (Women) This act shall also
serve as a team warning for reaching through the boundary. (See Rule
4-17-1.g.)
6. Illegal contact with an elbow that occurs above the shoulders of an
opponent when the elbows are not swung excessively per 4-36-7.a.

Even in the NCAA they don't call what was described as an intentional. It will be a common foul or nothing. INTs are shoves from behind, not nudges. Note the word "to prevent a score". It's got to be hard enough to be capable of preventing the score.

Actually, this particular play likely falls under NFHS c (above), not d.

This is a better passage. The problem is that is hard to tell by the description of the OP though.

Peace

Fellas, I was just pointing out the differences in wording...

HS says excessive.
NCAA says excessive &/or unneccesary.

Whether they nudge or shove, its still a form of pushing. Airborne shooters dont get shoved or nudged from behind in my games. Just like an elbow hit or elbow tap... its still a foul.

Thats all :)