Intentional

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by Adam

Ask them for a rule reference on that. I'm curious how they'll answer.

They were using the to "keep the clock from starting/stopping" clause.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

They were using the to "keep the clock from starting/stopping" clause.

If it's "regular defense," then it's regular defense.

Do they call an intentional when the ball handler is fouled to stop the clock?

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by Adam

If it's "regular defense," then it's regular defense.

Do they call an intentional when the ball handler is fouled to stop the clock?

This is the most logical argument against theirs. I like it.

[JetMetFan]

Sharp are they saying a kid playing denial defense on a Team A player who commits a foul on a throw-in late in the game deserves an intentional? They’d better be prepared to call a T on Team B’s HC because that’s what’s going to happen.

(Sigh) The old “contact away from the ball with an opponent who is clearly not involved with a play” clause. Sometimes the ability to read the rule book can be a dangerous thing. By their logic they’d also have to call an intentional foul if B1 bumped a cutter who was on the other side of the court in that scenario.

[BigT]

What is the foul is to put the worst foul shooter on the line and he is not involved with the play and to keep the clock from running?

Rule: 4-19-3


ART. 3

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.

4.19.3 SITUATION D:

Late in the fourth quarter Team B is trailing by six points. Team B's head coach begins to yell to his or her players to "foul, foul, foul!" B1 responds by (a) grabbing A1 from behind, or (b) reaching for the ball but illegally contacting A1 on the arm.

RULING: In (a), an intentional foul shall be called. In (b), a common foul shall be called as B1 was making a legitimate attempt to "play the ball."

COMMENT: Fouling near the end of a game is an acceptable coaching and playing strategy. Officials must determine if a foul is intentional by judging the fouling act itself, not whether or not the coach instructed a player to perform the act.

I remember learning something on this site long ago.

If you havent handed the ball to the inbounder and their is decent severe illegal contact isn't it call one way.

If the ball is at his disposal wouldnt the rule and case book above be used to term if its common or intentional?

And can anyone explain a scenario or situation where a team wants to prevent the clock from starting and what penalty for the contact they called?

[deecee]

Originally Posted by BigT

And can anyone explain a scenario or situation where a team wants to prevent the clock from starting and what penalty for the contact they called?

Depending on what they do I can imagine a DOG or T.

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by BigT

If the ball is at his disposal wouldnt the rule and case book above be used to term if its common or intentional?

The case play covers two distinct plays. It is not absolute in any possible way. You have to consider each play on its own merits and determine whether it was intentional or common. That's why they pay us the big bucks.

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by BigT

If you havent handed the ball to the inbounder and their is decent severe illegal contact isn't it call one way.

The call in this situation has nothing to do with the play being a throw in, it is called a certain way because the ball is dead. When there is contact that is not incidental while the ball is dead, it is a technical foul.

[BigT]

Thank you.

Basically you can have common fouls when the clock is stopped and the ball is in the hands of the person throwing in the ball.

If you think they are fouling the big man to get him on the line you could call an intentional?

If they grab their best player to prevent him from getting open you could call another IF.

Wouldnt you say most referees shy away from the IF unless it is super obvious to not get pulled into the spot light?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BigT

What is the foul is to put the worst foul shooter on the line and he is not involved with the play and to keep the clock from running?

It's a play different from the one described in the OP. Thus, the different ruling.

Originally Posted by Adam

If it's "regular defense," then it's regular defense.

Do they call an intentional when the ball handler is fouled to stop the clock?

I had a coach ask for this. Defender went up to his player and held her jersey until my partner called it. He started screaming intentional.

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by AremRed

I had a coach ask for this. Defender went up to his player and held her jersey until my partner called it. He started screaming intentional.

Sounds like the coach had it right. Only question in this play is whether it is a personal foul (ball live) or technical foul (ball dead).

Originally Posted by johnny d

Sounds like the coach had it right. Only question in this play is whether it is a personal foul (ball live) or technical foul (ball dead).

Coach was not right. If fouling at the end of game to stop the clock and force the other team to shoot free throws so they can get the ball back is an intentional foul then I guess every official I have ever seen officiate this situation has called it wrong.

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Coach was not right. If fouling at the end of game to stop the clock and force the other team to shoot free throws so they can get the ball back is an intentional foul then I guess every official I have ever seen officiate this situation has called it wrong.

Grabbing a jersey to force that scenario is just about always an intentional foul around here. And we do call it that way.

Originally Posted by Smitty

Grabbing a jersey to force that scenario is just about always an intentional foul around here. And we do call it that way.

I understand. In my situation I was L tableside. A1 had the ball right in front of T. B1 tried to slap the ball away from A1 but misses and fouls A1. T does not call it as he is straight lined. A1 is just standing in place holding the ball. B1 tries another tactic and pulls A1's jersey, maybe about 2-3 inches. B1 then looks at T until he sees it and calls it. The coach screamed intentional but no way I am calling an INT after my partner missed the first foul and based on the tiny amount of shirt-holding going on.