Quote:
In a close gamy the team that is behind deserves to have an opportunity to get the ball back.
|
What exactly do you mean? First of all, they have all the opportunity in the world: steal. Second, neither team is deserving of anything other than a game fairly played according to the spirit and intent of the rules.
There are multiple problems in the current system that were either never originally intended or have grown into a huge problem. First, as the rules currently are, the committee is allowing to commit rules infractions specifically to gain an advantage. They allow fouls to stop the clock as an "acceptable coaching strategy." I disagree strongly with that, but be that as it may, change the rule so that it becomes less effective. Can you name any other sport that essentially allows infractions by teams to gain an advantage?
Second, with the advent of the 3 point shot 2 decades ago, teams gain a huge advantage by essentially trading a (potentially) 2 shot foul for a 3 point attempt (everything else going as planned). Unless we can come up with a third bonus free throw after, say, 12 fouls, or eliminate the 1 and 1 and go to 2 shots at 7 fouls and 3 shots at 10 (something I'd be willing to discuss), then this is nothing but an advantage for a team that, again, commits a rules infraction.
Finally, these games are taking too damn long. Games with 32 playing minutes are often taking 3 times that to complete. Either due to coaching or other factors, the game is much more physical than it was 2 decades essentially forcing us to call more fouls. Teams with 15 players don't really fear foul-outs much, and because free throw shooting, by and large, is so abysmal, teams don't really concern themselves with foul counts. The committee has got to step back and say, "hey, this isn't where we want this sport to go."