Another First

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Scuba_ref

And that is all I am trying to say...we have to judge the act.

Case 4.19.3.C uses foul examples that would be intentional at any point during the game...grabbing the jersey or a two-handed push in the back. A hold by the defense on an offensive player away from the ball that would get a hold call in the third quarter will still get a hold call at the end of the fourth quarter. I'm not upgrading to an intentional simply because I know the defense is trying to stop the clock. The case book comment gives me all I need to defend that call. The comment doesn't state the foul has to be against the player with the ball.

Did you read the ruling in 4.19.3C?

It is an intentional personal foul designed to stop the clock from starting or to neutralize an opponent's obvious advantageous position.

Like I told the coach, it's not an automatic INT, but I should have added that the threshold for it goes down in this situation if they try to foul a player not involved in the play.

[Scuba_ref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Did you read the ruling in 4.19.3C?


Like I told the coach, it's not an automatic INT, but I should have added that the threshold for it goes down in this situation if they try to foul a player not involved in the play.

We are not going to agree on this. The following is my opinion and is how I call the late stages of close games:

Yes I read the case play...I quoted the two foul examples used in the case play. Those two examples are most likely getting an intentional from me at any stage of the game and so they really are poor examples to use in that case.

Did you read the COMMENT? The COMMENT modifies the intentional foul rule sort of like an exception. During late game situations it is an acceptable practice to foul. A common off-ball foul late in the game is not getting upgraded to an intentional simply because it occured in the late stages of the game even if the perceived intent was to stop the clock. The COMMENT doesn't state that the foul must be committed against the player with the ball. However, an off-ball two-handed push in the back or a blatant grab of the jersey will get an intentional because the act in and of itself qualifies as an intentional foul.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Scuba_ref

We are not going to agree on this. The following is my opinion and is how I call the late stages of close games:

Yes I read the case play...I quoted the two foul examples used in the case play. Those two examples are most likely getting an intentional from me at any stage of the game and so they really are poor examples to use in that case.

Did you read the COMMENT? The COMMENT modifies the intentional foul rule sort of like an exception. During late game situations it is an acceptable practice to foul. A common off-ball foul late in the game is not getting upgraded to an intentional simply because it occured in the late stages of the game even if the perceived intent was to stop the clock. The COMMENT doesn't state that the foul must be committed against the player with the ball. However, an off-ball two-handed push in the back or a blatant grab of the jersey will get an intentional because the act in and of itself qualifies as an intentional foul.

I honestly don't think we're that far apart, but you're right, we're probably not going to agree.

[Scuba_ref]

But, I was able to get my post count up on this discussion. That was a definite plus!

[RookieDude]

Originally Posted by Scuba_ref

But, I was able to get my post count up on this discussion. That was a definite plus!

...what would Steve S., from up your way, do?

[Scuba_ref]

Originally Posted by RookieDude

...what would Steve S., from up your way, do?

I'm fairly confident that he would call it very similar to how I am calling it. I'll ask him next time I see him.