Scenario:

A player is fouled on a made shot attempt, and it's ruled an intentional foul.

Is it one free throw or two?

 

I'm not sure I'd seen this before, and normally I wouldn't even question what was done, but tonight two officials (after a discussion) signaled one shot. Team was about to inbound the ball after the free throw and the third official, who had been talking to one of the coaches, came in and held up play, and another free throw was shot.

Two shots and the ball OOB nearest the location of the foul.

A potential 5 point play? And the ball.

Can it still be an intentional foul if the defender goes for the ball?

 

Player A went up for a layup. Player B comes from behind and is clearly going for the ball and hits Player A with a lot of body as well. Intentional foul?

Can it still be an intentional foul if the defender goes for the ball?

 

Player A went up for a layup. Player B comes from behind and is clearly going for the ball and hits Player A with a lot of body as well. Intentional foul?

 

Yes...Actually saw this happen this year in my team's 2nd game of the season.

 

Player A (on the home team, FWIW) was on a breakaway layup. Player B (my teammate) goes up and actually sends the ball to the second row. Lots of body contact. Should have been called a foul. Our coach went ballistic when they called an intentional. I was told the foul was for "excessive contact" (which I've never heard of) despite Player B's successful attempt at the ball.

Yes...Actually saw this happen this year in my team's 2nd game of the season.

 

Player A (on the home team, FWIW) was on a breakaway layup. Player B (my teammate) goes up and actually sends the ball to the second row. Lots of body contact. Should have been called a foul. Our coach went ballistic when they called an intentional. I was told the foul was for "excessive contact" (which I've never heard of) despite Player B's successful attempt at the ball.

 

I was wondering. I saw the same thing tonight. Kid went for the ball. Hard foul with no intent to cause harm. Just a good hard foul to prevent a made basket with a foul like they are taught to do. Got the block and lots of body involved. Nevermind that kid shooting outweighed the defender by 20-30 pounds of muscle and 4 inches. :lol2: Intentional foul. Looked way worse than what it was but he did go for the ball.

Can it still be an intentional foul if the defender goes for the ball?

 

Player A went up for a layup. Player B comes from behind and is clearly going for the ball and hits Player A with a lot of body as well. Intentional foul?

 

 

Yes. For some reason the NFHS lumps the wording of "excessive contact" in with the intentional foul rule. It really needs its own signal since everyone loses their mind when the intentional sign is given.

Not sure about the call but believe the defender didn't get the block, think the shot was made, the and one was made and the free throw for the intentional was made??

Not sure about the call but believe the defender didn't get the block, think the shot was made, the and one was made and the free throw for the intentional was made??

 

If the shot went in there is no "and 1."

 

Basket counts. You then enforce intentional foul penalty. Two shots and the ball.

Wasn't sure, thanks

The basket was made and the ref give the intentional call signal. The have the player an and one free throw then a free throw for the intentional foul and the ball oob. I am assuming we are talking about the bracken Mason game last night. Very strange set of events during that sequence. Refs huddled for some time to come to the conclusion they came too. With that said players on both sides were wondering why an intentional was even called. Play was on the ball and wasn't even a "hard" foul. Seen a lot worse throughout the game that wasn't called. Like I said on another thread some nights those calls go your way and some nights they don't. That's life on the road.

some nights those calls go your way and some nights they don't. That's life on the road.

 

Can we pin this to the top of the thread? Better yet, make it the URL for the site.