Whats going on?

[Double D]

IMO they simply need to change the rule to award 2 shots and the ball for a "flagrant foul."

We all know when a foul is "intentional." This would take a lot of pressure off the officials and give them the ability to severely penalize overly aggressive fouls that put the players well being at risk.

[wily coyote]

IMO they simply need to change the rule to award 2 shots and the ball for a "flagrant foul."

We all know when a foul is "intentional." This would take a lot of pressure off the officials and give them the ability to severely penalize overly aggressive fouls that put the players well being at risk.

DD with a flagrant foul you also have to add the player gets ejected because he does under current rules. With an intentional foul an ejection does not take place.

[lefty]

all these intentional foul calls are silly, though...just make the call and move on...just the way we've always done it....
but for each and every one, the refs stop the game, huddle for several minutes, then walk to the scorers table and watch the replay for several minutes....
then they repeat the whole process a few minutes later when the kid who was clobbered fights back....
Again...I say either call it and move on, or eject the kid, or whatever...
but the 5-10 minute delay on each of these calls is getting a bit silly......

yeah...I agree with all the time it takes.....make the call and go.

I know people want to make sure they get the call right but it's getting a little nuts. The ISU red game was a good example of that

[Double D]

DD with a flagrant foul you also have to add the player gets ejected because he does under current rules. With an intentional foul an ejection does not take place.

Then that needs to be eliminated to give the officials the flexability to apply a penalty equal to the level of foul. A player can be too aggressive (undercut, two handed push, etc.) without the need for an ejection.

[wily coyote]

Then that needs to be eliminated to give the officials the flexability to apply a penalty equal to the level of foul. A player can be too aggressive (undercut, two handed push, etc.) without the need for an ejection.

DD you are right the penalty should fit the crime and thats where some of the problems lie. IT is up to the officials to determine if a foul is intentional,flagrant or just a plain common foul. Each have their own penalities and are very different. The problem comes with what one official may call something an intentional ,whereas another may call the same thing a common foul or a flagrant and that leads to the confusion. The penalities are clear for each type of foul but determining which it is sometimes leaves a lot to be desired.