If B-1 causes excessive contact while A-1 is driving, is it correct for the official to call it an intentional personal foul?

The scenario describes a situation where player B-1 is causing excessive contact with player A-1 during a drive. An intentional personal foul is characterized by actions that are deemed to be excessively aggressive or unsportsmanlike, beyond what is typical for competitive play. The key factor in determining whether the foul is deemed intentional is the nature of the contact.

In this case, if B-1's actions are classified as causing excessive contact while A-1 is driving, it is appropriate for the official to call it an intentional personal foul. This is because the excessive nature of the contact demonstrates a lack of regard for the safety of the player with the ball, which fits the criterion for intentional fouls. Even if A-1 was not airborne, the focus remains on the nature of the contact, not the player's position.

This reasoning clarifies why the other options do not align with the definition of an intentional foul. The first option does not require A-1 to be airborne for the foul to be called intentional, and the presence or absence of another defender, while relevant in certain situations, does not override the clear definition of excessive or aggressive contact. Thus, under these circumstances, the foul should be categorized as intentional, supporting the conclusion that it is