What you guys Think of this? (Video)

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Rich1

Count me in with those who have an intentional foul to go along with the T. By rule, if the player is not making a play on the ball it is an intentional foul. I see the defender grab the dribbler from behind with both hands almost in the fashion of a bear hug. I see no problem with how it was called and probably would have called it the same if I were there. Also note, that the opposing coach stood up immediately calling for the flagrant so others saw it that way when it happened as well (I know several of you will want to blast that statement with some comment about coaches dictating calls but I am ony including it to demonstrate that it was seen that way by him). And, any T that resulted is to be blamed on the player. It does not matter why he disagrees with the call or how bad a call may be a player should never comment or demonstrate in an unsporting manner.

Finally, for any of us to question the honesty and credibility of other officials is unprofessional and counter productive. I don't know one guy nor have I heard of one game from my area where an official cheated. As they like to say in grade school, when you point a finger at someone there are four pointing back at you.

I hope in the future some of you more regular posters can stop trying so hard to find fault with others and stick to discussing / debating rules and situations. I enjoy coming to the forum to learn from each of you but find it hard to wade through the constant negativity of some posters.

Rich1:

I am piggy backing onto your post because your first paragraph describes pretty accurately why B1's Personal Foul could be seen as an Intentional PF. And to be honest, we are watching the video on a small screen and not at quite the angle that the T saw it in real time and in full size.

This game was a non-league game for both schools. Lorain H.S. is in the Lake Erie League in the OhioHSAA's Northeast District, and Norwalk H.S. is in the Northern Ohio League in the the OhioHSAA's Northwest District. I do not know any of the officials in the game and this is the first time I have seen either of them.

As far as the Northern Ohio League is concerned I do not know if these officials were assigned by the league commissioner or by the Norwalk H.S. athletic director. The vast majority of leagues in Ohio only assign their member schools' league games and the member schools' then assign their own officials for their home non-league games. And whether this is the case in the NOL or not, in the vast majority of leagues the only way that an official can get league assignments from commissioners is if they have been recommended by at least one coach in the league: no recommendation by a coach, means a commissioner cannot assign him games in that league. Welcome to Ohio (and Michigan for that matter too).

MTD, Sr.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The foul should be judged on the contact, not their desire to get the clock stopped.

Not according to the first line of 4-19-3 (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). If A1 had just been standing there and B1 ran up to him and hugged him - in a non-violent manner - to pick up a foul, that's an IF.

That being said I can live with an IF on the first play but I wouldn't have been shocked if it had been called a common foul. The second one...eh. I thought the ball handler was off balance but given what had just been called so be it.

As for the T, we can't hear what was said but good, bad or indifferent call we all know there are certain things that are automatic. I'd have to think the last thing the official wanted to do was ring someone up after the IF but it is what it is.

Oh...to the folks who posted the vids, when you embed a YouTube clip you can set it to start at a certain point. That way some of us on very slow work computers don't have to wait for the video to buffer

[Pantherdreams]

For the officials who think the "bear hug" motion by the defender could warrant an intentional. If the defender, is behind/ on the backside of the offensive player and can't swipe or chop at the ball. If he also wants to reach to get the ball and is willing/instructed to risk taking foul. Do you feel he can't reach for the ball around the body with both hands to assure he gets to make a play on the ball regardless of which hand it ends up in?

If he was in front and reached with both I wouldn't see if being a problem. Why if the offensive player chooses to put his body between the player and the ball does this stop being a play on the basketball.

Just curious unless there is excessive contact or absolutely no play on the ball at all we wouldn't go intentional around these here parts. So long as the player is reaching for the ball and contact is not excessive we've got a common foul.

[ballgame99]

Its all been said at this point, but my reaction was that was a common foul. He's making enough of a play on the ball for me and the contact wasn't excessive. And unless the HC called him a c**ksucker at full volume, I think you need to lay off the T.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by ballgame99

Its all been said at this point, but my reaction was that was a common foul. He's making enough of a play on the ball for me and the contact wasn't excessive. And unless the HC called him a c**ksucker at full volume, I think you need to lay off the T.

The T was for #3, who obviously came up to the calling officials and said at least one magic word.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

For the officials who think the "bear hug" motion by the defender could warrant an intentional.... If the defender...wants to reach to get the ball and is willing/instructed to risk taking [a] foul[,] Do you feel he can't reach for the ball around the body with both hands to assure he gets to make a play on the ball regardless of which hand it ends up in?

Usually, though not always.

Reaching around a ballhandler with one hand is generally a play on the ball. What does one hope to accomplish with using both arms, especially in that scenario? If you're very lucky and have Gumbyesque arms, you might get a held ball out of the deal, but how often do we see steals from behind using both arms?

From my viewpoint, if the defender in the OP's video solely had used his left arm, it would be a common foul, and he possibly (although not likely) could have stolen the ball. As others have pointed out, the reason the IF rule was put into place was to prevent these late fouls to stop the clock. If you're going to foul, fine, but make a play on the ball.

I had a very strange IPF last week: A1 gets a defensive rebound, and while he started dribbling back the other way, B2 reaches around A1's waist and pulls him back, as if A1 were a running back breaking away. It wasn't particularly malicious, just a matter-of-fact hug from behind. What made this excessively strange is Team B was AHEAD 7 points with 2:30ish to go. I had to double-check the scoreboard to make sure I had the right team in the lead. I did. Still baffled.

Originally Posted by bainsey

I had to double-check the scoreboard to make sure I had the right team in the lead.

This sounds fishy with no context.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by bainsey

As others have pointed out, the reason the IF rule was put into place was to prevent these late fouls to stop the clock.

This statement couldn't be more false, IMO.

[j51969]

The two knobs in the booth are priceless!

[HokiePaul]

Originally Posted by AremRed

By my count there are 18 different people participating in this thread. Also by my count only 2 (Freddy, bainsy) have agreed with the Intentional foul.

Make that 19 ... It actually looked like there was an attempt to play the ball. I saw the left hand swipe at the ball a couple of times (got all arm/body, but never-the-less), and that contact certainly did not appear excessive.

In my opinion, this is an official who is "looking" for an excuse to call an intentional foul. I don't think officials should be looking to call intentional fouls (only exception would be elbow in motion making contact above the shoulders since a common foul is not an option).

Given how bad this call was (again, my opinion), I have no doubt that something was said that made the T and easy call.

[egj13]

similiar to the 0.2 seconds left play, these men should be flogged in public and never allowed to work a HS game again

[APG]

Just my opinion:

If there's an intentional foul here in this situation, especially when it's evident that the losing team is fouling on purpose, then the call has to be obvious. It has to be obvious enough that you don't have 19 (or whatever the count) officials saying it's a common foul to only 2-3 in favor for it.

Originally Posted by egj13

similiar to the 0.2 seconds left play, these men should be flogged in public and never allowed to work a HS game again

While I didn't necessarily agree with that sentiment in the previous thread, there's a huge difference between a questionable judgement and a flat out misapplication of the rules.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Hugging the dribbler? Easy intentional. Go for the steal.

BTW.... "Truckers"?

Bainsey:

You asked: "Truckers"?

Yesterday, Norwalk H.S. finished their season (29-1) by defeating defending champion Columbus Watterson H.S. (26-3), 65-58, for the OhioHSAA Division II Boys' State Championship.

MTD, Sr.

[Rich]

I was watching the end of a girls state tournament game this weekend and a team that was behind needed to foul stop the clock.

Defender reached out and tapped the ball-handler on the back with one hand. A foul was called. Properly, in my opinion. Nobody thought twice about the call.

To me, there's an unwritten contract in these situations. Team wants to foul, call that foul the first time they try for it and make contact. Nobody wins when you demand to excess that it be a "good" foul - contact that would be proper to pass on earlier in the game is not proper to pass on in this situation. And that foul's not intentional unless the person doing it is truly stupid and forces the official into making that call.

[Coach Bill]

Originally Posted by Rich

I was watching the end of a girls state tournament game this weekend and a team that was behind needed to foul stop the clock.

Defender reached out and tapped the ball-handler on the back with one hand. A foul was called. Properly, in my opinion. Nobody thought twice about the call.

To me, there's an unwritten contract in these situations. Team wants to foul, call that foul the first time they try for it and make contact. Nobody wins when you demand to excess that it be a "good" foul - contact that would be proper to pass on earlier in the game is not proper to pass on in this situation. And that foul's not intentional unless the person doing it is truly stupid and forces the official into making that call.

This is the way I'd like to see it called. Like in the NCAA and NBA, the refs know the foul is coming, just call it. Our team got a IF one time when my guy whacked a guy's arm (no call), whacked it again (no call), pushed him (tweet, intentional foul).

Count me on the list as this did not deserve an intentional foul.

And, for Bainsey, who said something about this being in the rule book, to prevent fouling at the end of the game, it's also in the rule book/case book, that fouling at the end of the game is an accepted strategy (or something similar). At least it was a few years ago.