Video Request (This is the thread) - December 21, 2016

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

That is fine, but it is not working that way. This defender was in no way crowding the offense. The rule needs some fine tuning. A defender should be able to take any vertical position short of contact. If there is not enough room for another to make a move, too bad. That is essence of defense.

Most of the crowding situations they really needed to clean up involved actually creating contact....bellying up.

As stated, this was the argument against the previous interpretations of the NCAA that the offensive player should be able to have room to move or even create space in order to make a move. Now, officials did not make this rule. Coaches, ADs and administrators did as they are the main ones that sit on the committee. I do not believe the Supervisor of Officials is actually on the committee at all. So when these plays took place in the past, the defense was, "They should have space to move." Well they got rid of that on some level. It is not about if I agree with it, that is the rule now. They want defenders to give them room. And if you saw the video examples that the NCAA put out there to support this rule, this looks like all the plays where this is a foul on the defender.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

As stated, this was the argument against the previous interpretations of the NCAA that the offensive player should be able to have room to move or even create space in order to make a move. Now, officials did not make this rule. Coaches, ADs and administrators did as they are the main ones that sit on the committee. I do not believe the Supervisor of Officials is actually on the committee at all. So when these plays took place in the past, the defense was, "They should have space to move." Well they got rid of that on some level. It is not about if I agree with it, that is the rule now. They want defenders to give them room. And if you saw the video examples that the NCAA put out there to support this rule, this looks like all the plays where this is a foul on the defender.

Peace

Understood.

I just think, like the elbow rule, the initial result isn't exactly what they really wanted. It may be what they asked for, though. I think it will be refined some as defenders in good position get tagged with silly fouls (like the one above).

Ultimately, the elbow rule was revised after several nonsense intentional fouls were called that really were not the intended target of the changes. I see this one going the same way.