The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Intentional Foul by the Shooter (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/96500-intentional-foul-shooter.html)

rfp Thu Nov 07, 2013 03:42pm

Intentional Foul by the Shooter
 
If A-1 drives to the basket and commits an intentional foul on the shot, by definition it's not a player control foul since a PCF is a common foul. If the shot goes in, though, that would mean the basket would count, no? Seems like an odd result. Am I missing something?

bob jenkins Thu Nov 07, 2013 03:46pm

If the try is in flight, it counts. If the try is not in flight, it does not count.

JRutledge Thu Nov 07, 2013 03:50pm

I cannot imagine a shooter committing an intentional foul. I guess it is possible, but I think it is a solution looking for a problem. But as Bob says, the basket could theoretically count.

Peace

Adam Thu Nov 07, 2013 03:56pm

Other than a good exercise in definitions and enforcement, I agree with Jeff. This would be the definition of a sasquatch.

Smitty Thu Nov 07, 2013 03:58pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 910090)
I cannot imagine a shooter committing an intentional foul.

Never seen it but I can imagine a player throwing a deliberate elbow to the head of a defender on his way up. Or maybe a deliberate kick - something like that maybe?

JRutledge Thu Nov 07, 2013 04:01pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smitty (Post 910092)
Never seen it but I can imagine a player throwing a deliberate elbow to the head of a defender on his way up. Or maybe a deliberate kick - something like that maybe?

When that happens, take pictures and get video. Even then it might be a man in a monkey suit. ;)

Peace

JetMetFan Thu Nov 07, 2013 04:13pm

Well, it's covered in the case book (NFHS & NCAA) so it must have happened at least once :)

Quote:

NFHS 4.19.6 SITUATION B:

Is it possible for airborne shooter A1 to commit a foul which would not be player control?

RULING: Yes. The airborne shooter could be charged with an intentional or flagrant personal foul or with a technical foul. (4-19-2, 4-19-3, 4-19-4)
Quote:

NCAAW A.R. 74. Is it possible for airborne shooter A1 to commit a foul that would not be a player-control foul?
RULING: Yes. The airborne shooter could be charged with a personal foul, a flagrant 1 personal foul, a flagrant 2 personal foul or with a flagrant 2 noncontact technical foul. None of these fouls can be a player-control foul. When an airborne shooter commits a foul that is not a player-control foul, the infraction shall be penalized as dictated by the type of foul. (Rule 4-15.2.a.1)

JRutledge Thu Nov 07, 2013 04:33pm

I am not convinced that everything in the casebook actually happened. I think the casebook is trying to define what we should do, not necessarily what is reality or has happened. At least that is not why they posted the play. ;)

Peace

HokiePaul Thu Nov 07, 2013 04:37pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 910093)
When that happens, take pictures and get video. Even then it might be a man in a monkey suit. ;)

Peace

Wasn't there some controversy (somewhat) recently with Kobe Bryant kicking out his legs at defenders while shooting? I seem to remember this making the rounds on ESPN but I can't find any video evidence on youTube (I assume this is due to NBA copyright rules).

I'm sure it wasn't an "intentional foul" by NBA rules, but I could see how this could happen.

JRutledge Thu Nov 07, 2013 04:40pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by HokiePaul (Post 910096)
Wasn't there some controversy (somewhat) recently with Kobe Bryant kicking out his legs at defenders while shooting? I seem to remember this making the rounds on ESPN but I can't find any video evidence on youTube (I assume this is due to NBA copyright rules).

I'm sure it wasn't an "intentional foul" by NBA rules, but I could see how this could happen.

Reggie Miller was notorious for kicking out his legs. Not sure it was a controversy but once again, I doubt seriously that anyone is advocating calling such action in any situation of interpretation calling those intentional fouls.

Once again, sounds like a solution looking for a problem. Of course it "could" happen. A lot of things could happen, but how many have actually seen such a thing and called it that way?

Peace

johnny d Thu Nov 07, 2013 04:44pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 910093)
When that happens, take pictures and get video. Even then it might be a man in a monkey suit. ;)

Peace

Not exactly the same thing, but I remember a play from the Witchita St. vs. Illinois St. game last season where a rebounder intentionally kicked an opponent and was eventually charged (after monitor review) with a flagrant 1 foul. After seeing that play, it doesn't seem as far fetched for a shooter to try the same thing. Unlikely, yes, so unlikely that it could only be done by the man in the monkey suit, maybe not.

rfp Thu Nov 07, 2013 04:51pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adam (Post 910091)
Other than a good exercise in definitions and enforcement, I agree with Jeff. This would be the definition of a sasquatch.

It's a question on this year's IAABO test, that's why I bring it up. The idea of counting the basket if it went in seemed strange.

JRutledge Thu Nov 07, 2013 04:54pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by johnny d (Post 910099)
Not exactly the same thing, but I remember a play from the Witchita St. vs. Illinois St. game last season where a rebounder intentionally kicked an opponent and was eventually charged (after monitor review) with a flagrant 1 foul. After seeing that play, it doesn't seem as far fetched for a shooter to try the same thing. Unlikely, yes, so unlikely that it could only be done by the man in the monkey suit, maybe not.

If I recall that play was not called a foul at all until the review. We cannot go back and review plays like they can at the NCAA level. There are many examples of calls being made without a whistle after a review for all kinds of plays. And we are not talking about an intentional foul of other players, but with a shooter. That is not the same as what is being talked about with a rebounder or on a screen.

Peace

johnny d Thu Nov 07, 2013 04:59pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 910102)
If I recall that play was not called a foul at all until the review. We cannot go back and review plays like they can at the NCAA level. There are many examples of calls being made without a whistle after a review for all kinds of plays. And we are not talking about an intentional foul of other players, but with a shooter. That is not the same as what is being talked about with a rebounder or on a screen.

Peace

I understand all that. I was just pointing out that before seeing this play, most people wouldn't have imagined an airborne rebounder lining up an opponent and kicking him on purpose either. Now that it has happened, I can see the potential of some jackass doing the same thing while shooting. I wasn't referring to how you handle or call the play in anyway, just the odds of it actually happening.

johnny d Thu Nov 07, 2013 05:02pm

Also, if I am not mistaken, there was a play in a college game last season where a 3-point shooter, after releasing the ball and while still in the air, grabbed his defender and threw him down. The shooter was called for a foul. It wasn't deemed an intentional foul, but it could have because it was a non-basketball play. I am thinking this happened in a Marquette or Georgetown game and was perhaps reviewed on this site.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:38am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1