View Single Post
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Mon Apr 15, 2019, 12:33pm
JRutledge JRutledge is online now
Do not give a damn!!
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 29,149
Originally Posted by AremRed View Post
1. Changing the goaltending rule to mimic NBA/NCAA-M/NCAA-W/FIBA (every f-ing major rule set btw) where you cannot block the ball once it has touched the backboard. This is an easy rule change, easy to call, easy to write, and it blows my mind they haven't done it.
I do not totally disagree, just think officials at those levels get this wrong still. I have seen so many plays at the NCAA level where the ball touched by the defender first and then hits the backboard and it is called. I still think the current rule fits better and honestly wish the NCAA would get rid of this on the Men's side. I get it, leave the ball alone but there is still too much of a debate over this call that I feel was not there before also.

Originally Posted by AremRed View Post
2. Eliminating the INANE "resumption of play procedure". Putting the ball down is an EASY way to piss off players, coaches, and fans and even if the team is extremely late makes the ref crew look terrible. Give us the option to assess a delay-of-game warning like every other reasonable rule set out there.
NCAA Men's still has this procedure for the most part (which we do not use the delays there either). It is rarely used by anyone at any level. And in my experience you do it once, it usually shut down the delays.

Originally Posted by AremRed View Post
3. Eliminating the need for a coach to sit down after a direct or indirect technical foul. I get the reasoning but it pisses off the coaches and makes refs a) less likely to call technical fouls on the coach/bench and b) less likely to have the balls and make the coach sit after the tech. And even if they are told to sit they are terrible at remembering and almost never get a second one for standing.
I do not care about this either way. If they change it great. If they don't change it I will sleep the same. It would eliminate one more thing to talk to a coach about if we give a T. But we have to get officials to call the T in the first place, then we can worry about what they do afterward IMO.

Originally Posted by AremRed View Post
4. Point of emphasis for schools properly marking coaching box and officials enforcing it. I have seen SO MANY games this year with the floor not marked properly, not all the chairs inside the team area, coaches on the floor yelling at officials, coaches camping at halfcourt to coach offense/defense on other side of the floor, and assistant coaches standing and in one case in my game coming out of the head coaching box to call a play at half court. I heard many times this season "you're the only one to enforce this all year" and that's wrong.

There are other ones: delayed violation for player running OOB along the baseline, re-subbing once the ball has become live instead of sit-a-tick, requiring two horns for replacements intervals and officials calling techs when coaches slow roll a replacement sub, restricted area, shot clock (gonna have way more stoppages due to shitty operators), changing full timeouts to 75 seconds, allowing the headbands with extensions for girls (so dumb that pro and college allow it yet it's a "safety issue" in HS), clarifying the team control rule for fouls during throw-ins only.
Delay for running OOB would be a good change. Also that line "You are the first person to enforce....blah, blah, blah" is just a line given to make it seem like you are being overly technical. It is a lie much of the time. I know officials that have enforced rules in the game right before an that still comes out of their mouth. I would in theory love to have a shot clock in HS, but we are going to be correcting so many mistakes and games will be influenced by all those mistakes that it will become a real distraction. If we cannot get good people to run these clocks at the small college level, we are really going to have issues at the HS level. I would rather not have the headache, but it would be good if run properly, even though I do not think it is going to change the game that much in this era.

Let us get into "Good Trouble."
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote