Okay, I'm really struggling to see why anybody would seriously suggest changing the closely guarded rule in this way. Here's the submitted rationale: "The current rule gives a decided advantage to the defender and takes away a vital skill in ball handling, controlling the dribble. The rule should be changed to eliminate the element of dribbling, or the distance should be reduced. Under the current rule, a player with the ball at the top of the 3-point arc can be closely guarded by a defender standing on the free throw line."
First of all, as I understand it, all of these types of rules that have been tried over the years have, at their root, the express intention of neutralizing the Hot Rod Hundleys of the world. We don't want a super-skilled dribbler to be able to control the ball for minutes at a time. But this proposal seems to want to go there.
Second of all, three feet? Are you kidding me? Any reasonably quick point guard will blow right by any defeneder who is within three feet. So if we reduce the distance, we screw the defense. Sure, this rule works in NCAAW, but they also have a relatively short shot clock to force the action.
Am I missing something? Or is this just a non-starter? And, if so, how did this ever get past the survey and onto the proposed list?
