Help a rookie out.

[jritchie]

Originally Posted by jeremy341a

In all instances both teams have 7 team fouls.

1. A1 while dribbling in the backcourt dribbles the ball off his own foot. While chasing down the ball A1 shoves B1. There are no free throws awarded as team A still has team control.

2. A1 while dribbling in the backcourt dribbles the ball off his own foot. While chasing down the ball B1 shoves A1. A1 is awarded bonus freethrows.

3. A1 attempts a shot and on the rebound A2 fouls B1. B1 is awarded bonus freethrows due to neither team having team control.

Am I correct?

In 1 and 2, the shove could also be an intentional or flagrant foul, then you would have 2 free throws and a possible ejection if flagrant.

[jeremy341a]

Originally Posted by jritchie

In 1 and 2, the shove could also be an intentional or flagrant foul, then you would have 2 free throws and a possible ejection if flagrant.

Yeah I worded that poorly. I should have used another term to mean a common foul. Guess that's why I teach Math and not English.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by jritchie

In 1 and 2, the shove could also be an intentional or flagrant foul, then you would have 2 free throws and a possible ejection if flagrant.

Why?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Why?

Why not?

[tref]

I appreciated jritchie take on this, the push/shove could be so egregious that we have no choice but to upgrade from a common personal to an intentional/flagrant personal.

Coach: But it was a loose ball

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Adam

Why not?

When it comes to intentional/flagrant, I want to have a reason TO call it, not look for a reason not to call it.

As described, it didn't sound at all intentional or flagrant. Why should I go looking for a reason to make it one.

Two guys going for a lose ball and one knocks the other over on the way to the ball....common foul to me.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

When it comes to intentional/flagrant, I want to have a reason TO call it, not look for a reason not to call it.

As described, it didn't sound at all intentional or flagrant. Why should I go looking for a reason to make it one.

Two guys going for a lose ball and one knocks the other over on the way to the ball....common foul to me.

I agree, I don't go looking to call intentional or flagrant fouls. They're typically pretty obvious when they happen. But using the word "shove" means at least the intentional could logically be considered for discussion.

[tref]

Originally Posted by Adam

I agree, I don't go looking to call intentional or flagrant fouls. They're typically pretty obvious when they happen. But using the word "shove" means at least the intentional could logically be considered for discussion.

True story, we look for a reason to rotate not to upgrade. Those pretty much call themselves.
With the OP being a rookie, I thought jritchies point was a good one.
If I got the WHOLE truth & nothing but the truth when I first started out, I wouldnt have had to forget so many of the half truths.
Newer officials take the words we say to heart... I know I did.

I remember being told that just pointing on OOB was a college mechanic. Years later I found out it was a womens mechanic. The same for standing on the low block for the first of two FTs.

[RookieDude]

Originally Posted by tref

The same for standing on the low block for the first of two FTs.

I like this mechanic for a few reasons:

a) It shows the players there will be another FT

b) It looks cool...

c) Our assignor doesn't really care

...having said that, if the game is being "rated", using NFHS mechanics...I'll do it like the Romans do.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Adam

I agree, I don't go looking to call intentional or flagrant fouls. They're typically pretty obvious when they happen. But using the word "shove" means at least the intentional could logically be considered for discussion.

I see shoves every game. "Push" is a synonym for "shove". Hand checks are often "shoves". Seeing a push or hand check doesn't make me think intentional so why should shove.

However, fi it was a shove that was not part of just trying to get the ball (it had no basketball purpose) or was excessive, that is where it turns to an intentional.