Elbow contact above the shoulders.

[jeremy341a]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I did not say make up something, I said call the first foul. Often players react to players being all over them and we ignore those fouls because the player did not lose the ball or we call a held ball after a lot of contact took place. If you call the first foul you likely stop the frustration of throwing their elbows to get away and then you do not have to worry about calling an intentional foul or flagrant as a result. That is all I am saying.

Peace

I understand. We probably called fouls on the defense in this situation 7-10 times last night. We easily had over 50 fould total in the game.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by OKREF

The problem is the wording of the rule.

Disagree. I believe that the wording of the 2012-13 NFHS point of emphasis is quite clear, it's the different local interpretations of those words that's the problem. It's a problem of interpretation, and consistent enforcement, right here in my little corner of Connecticut.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

At 41.6 degrees latitude, you've moving at 74.77980905% of that - or 775.87 mph, just around the center of the earth.

Cool. Did you use your slide rule to figure out the cosine of 41.6 degrees? That would be ubercool.

[egj13]

I am going to bet that we see a rewording or clarification in next year's rule book.

I had a play like the OP on Saturday night. Kid rebounds, swings the ball from one side to the other but catches the defender in the chin so I whistle an intentional foul. Neither coach had an issue with it...I think it has been explained pretty well in our part of Montana. If an elbow hits a defender above the shoulders it is at a minimum an intentional.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by egj13

I am going to bet that we see a rewording or clarification in next year's rule book.

I had a play like the OP on Saturday night. Kid rebounds, swings the ball from one side to the other but catches the defender in the chin so I whistle an intentional foul. Neither coach had an issue with it...I think it has been explained pretty well in our part of Montana. If an elbow hits a defender above the shoulders it is at a minimum an intentional.

Part of the problem this is really not a rules change, it is a POE interpretation. And when they tend to make interpretation positions without changing the actual rule, these issues keep coming up. At least that is the way I see it.

Peace

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

POE: Contact with an elbow in movement should be an intentional foul.

State: An elbow moving with the torso is considered stationary.

Translation: We don't want that many intentional fouls called (me: it really isn't that many) and this sounds better than "Ignore this POE."

Originally Posted by Adam

Then you aren't really paying attention to what we're writing.

Sorry, but that went right over my head.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by egj13

I am going to bet that we see a rewording or clarification in next year's rule book.

Yeah? Sure. Right after they clean up the team control throwin backcourt exception rule.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Make interpretation positions (point of emphasis) without changing the actual rule.

Bingo. There was no change in the wording in the definition of intentional foul in Rule 4.