View Single Post
  #44 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 29, 2018, 06:20pm
thedewed thedewed is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 199
with all due respect, I do think that some of you are only considering whether the conduct is excessive, giving greater weight to the change of the word 'intentional' in the definition to 'flagrant' , when that change was only made to 'clarify' that conduct didn't need to be intentional to be penalized. That is the unintended loophole here in my opinion. Intentional contact should still be subject to the greater penalty if you believe it was intentional. And NCAA officials at this point are left to interpret what is intended by the language. And I know that we used to be taught that conduct off ball that was an intentional foul...was an intentional foul. More discretion was involved when the conduct was on-ball. None of that has been changed by anything the NCAA has said in guidelines, rules, interpretations, that I've found.

I also think a great change to the rule for many reasons would be a team always has the option to take the ball out of bounds rather than shoot free throws. A team should never be able to use fouling to its advantage would make for a better game, and shorten the game as well. Some teams would take the 2 fts of course, with a good ft shooter, in that there is always greater danger of a steal on throw-ins.

Last edited by thedewed; Mon Jan 29, 2018 at 06:22pm.
Reply With Quote