Basketball Needs To Be Fixed

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

Those alleging the game is "fine" are just fooling themselves. The game is not fine and has been going downhill for many years. The issues the OP raises, I raised here 10+ years ago. Too many on here have bought into the idiotic idea that committing rules infractions to gain an advantage is an acceptable part of any sport. Honestly, it is no wonder there is a college basketball recruiting scandal. Coaches know they can cheat on the floor and get away with it; why not do it in recruiting?

Yes, college basketball is one of the most popular sports during the sports year and we are fooling ourselves how? This site part of the site is the most popular than any other sport discussed.

What do players maybe being paid have anything to do with strategy at the end of the game that rarely works if the team takes advantage and makes their FTs? Because football must be in trouble too because they have scandals often about players getting extra benefits to go to their school or not to go to their school. (e.g Reggie Bush, Cam Newton allegations). Many more vacated wins in football than you ever see in basketball honestly. Just the Penn State situation is enough proof of that fact.

Peace

[BryanV21]

Coaches know they can cheat on the floor and get away with it; why not do it in recruiting?

That is a ludicrous leap in logic. One has to do with the game itself, and the other has to do with bringing players to your school. How in the World are they comparable?

A shot clock seems like a good thing in order to curb the fouling strategy... at least a bit. The biggest reason I'm against the shot clock coming to Ohio is I don't trust that it would be run correctly, and would create something else us officials would have to keep an eye on. Basically, the pros of a shot clock are not big enough for me to be for it.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

The biggest reason I'm against the shot clock coming to Ohio is I don't trust that it would be run correctly, and would create something else us officials would have to keep an eye on. Basically, the pros of a shot clock are not big enough for me to be for it.

Agree. We only use a shot clock for private prep school varsity games here in Connecticut as part of the hybrid NFHS/NCAA rules used on such games. Most of the time there's a student shot clock operator, usually a student team manager. A few do a good job, a few do a fair job, many do a terrible job, despite going over instructions with them before the game.

As game officials, we have the ability to do away with the shot clock in games where the operator is clearly having a great deal of difficulty. I've been part of crews that have been forced to use this nuclear option several times over the years.

From our statewide prep school guidelines:

If the shot clock operator has no or limited knowledge/experience:
- Be considerate; welcome individual to your “team”
- Review basic duties; do not provide an extended clinic

If the shot clock operator or shot clock presents ongoing mistakes or malfunctions; consider:
- Removal and replacement
- Removal and officiate game with no shot clock

Year after year, the shot clock continues to be an ongoing problem.

[so cal lurker]

Perhaps if the shot clock were more widely used, there would be better operators with time. It's used in CA, and I don't see a lot of problems, even in the lower level games. Yes, there are some, but a lot fewer than I would have expected. But it is something the refs have to be aware of. (I've never paid attention to whether they are mostly adults or mostly students running the shot clocl.)

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by so cal lurker

Perhaps if the shot clock were more widely used ... in the lower level games.

Agree. No shot clock for subvarsity private prep school games. Once a student manager figures out how to proficiently run the varsity shot clock, maybe running it for a year, or two, he graduates. Selfish kid. Just because he wants to graduate, go to college, have a successful career, get married, and raise a family, we get stuck with a new shot clock operator every year, or so.

[sj]

Here's one other thought on the subject.

Zach Lowe on The Basketball Tournament's innovative end-of-game rule

[ChuckS]

To all those who say “just make your free throws”, you are missing the point. The problem in basketball is that the penalty does not fit the crime. In baseball, if a fielder obstructs a runner, the runner is awarded the next base. In football, if a defender commits pass interference, the offense gets the ball at the spot as if the pass were completed.

But in basketball, assuming a 75% FT shooter, the defense can commit a foul to prevent a sure layup, and the offended team only gets 1.5 points, instead of 2. And the coach will yell “Good Foul”. A team is gaining an advantage by committing an illegal act.

[Paintguru]

Originally Posted by sj

Here's one other thought on the subject.

Zach Lowe on The Basketball Tournament's innovative end-of-game rule

The fact that higher ups are still discussing this as an issue makes me think the problem is real and not a "solution looking for a problem". Obviously this isn't something that needs to be fixed tomorrow or the sport will die, but a push to continually improve a sport or entertainment product.

I think the idea in the article is very interesting, but of course will never happen, as it is too radical for purists. However, I do bet something happens as professional sports leagues continue to try and retain viewers and optimize their product.

[nolanjj68]

What needs to be fixed in basketball is the behavior of jackass parents and coaches. That is what is hurting the game.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by ChuckS

To all those who say “just make your free throws”, you are missing the point. The problem in basketball is that the penalty does not fit the crime. In baseball, if a fielder obstructs a runner, the runner is awarded the next base. In football, if a defender commits pass interference, the offense gets the ball at the spot as if the pass were completed.

But in basketball, assuming a 75% FT shooter, the defense can commit a foul to prevent a sure layup, and the offended team only gets 1.5 points, instead of 2. And the coach will yell “Good Foul”. A team is gaining an advantage by committing an illegal act.

That's applicable to the entire game, not just the end. So basically some folks want to change the entire foundation of the game.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by ChuckS

To all those who say “just make your free throws”, you are missing the point. The problem in basketball is that the penalty does not fit the crime. In baseball, if a fielder obstructs a runner, the runner is awarded the next base. In football, if a defender commits pass interference, the offense gets the ball at the spot as if the pass were completed.

But in basketball, assuming a 75% FT shooter, the defense can commit a foul to prevent a sure layup, and the offended team only gets 1.5 points, instead of 2. And the coach will yell “Good Foul”. A team is gaining an advantage by committing an illegal act.

The game is about the most popular in our country across the board. Only football is more watched at all levels. Baseball for young kids is a total afterthought and you are complaining as if people really care about this. Fans like drama at the end of the game. When you make FTs, the drama ends.

Again, they get 5 fouls for a reason. Nothing in the rules says you cannot foul a player on purpose. And basketball is the main sport where a foul or violation of the rules allows the team an opportunity to score directly from the foul (I know soccer has a penalty shot and so does hockey, but those are rare in those game) Even the Intentional Foul is not called because it was done intentionally. It is called because of specific actions that are outside of normal play, which could involve excessive contact. So if I try to block a shot and I know that I am likely going to be called for a foul, an intentional foul should be called? Sorry, that sounds silly. Because there are times in the game when a defender wants to foul near the basket to send a message they will be there all game.

I do not see people walking away from the game over this issue. There is always something to complain about, but that does not mean it is not accepted by many. Again, make FTs and the strategy does not work.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Paintguru

The fact that higher ups are still discussing this as an issue makes me think the problem is real and not a "solution looking for a problem". Obviously this isn't something that needs to be fixed tomorrow or the sport will die, but a push to continually improve a sport or entertainment product.

I think the idea in the article is very interesting, but of course will never happen, as it is too radical for purists. However, I do bet something happens as professional sports leagues continue to try and retain viewers and optimize their product.

They have been talking about one and done rule too and nothing has changed drastically in that rule. And that is a rather recent policy. People talk about that much more than what happens at the end of an NBA game. Actually, the NBA's rule is less punitive than other levels.

Peace

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

In what other competition is committing a rules infraction an "acceptable strategy?"

In pretty much all of the direct competition sports...my HS football coaches taught us to tackle the receiver if we were beat deep, and that was a long time ago. My son was taught to tackle anyone who broke free by his High School soccer coach. Those are obvious rules infractions and were penalized accordingly...so let's not make it seem that basketball is in some "special category" because of late game fouling.

[rotationslim]

here is the radical proposal to do away with the end of game foolishness. It is a fascinating idea:

eliminate the game clock from crunch time. The clock would vanish after the first stoppage under the three-minute mark in the NBA and the four-minute mark in NCAA games. Officials would establish a target score by taking the score of the leading team and adding seven points -- then restart the game without a clock. The team that reaches that target score first wins.

That is an amazing idea-- all the sudden a team behind has to rely on defense to catch up-- rather than hacking.

[Raymond]

Someone let me know we the conversation gets back to officiating.

Rule change suggestions need to go to the NBA/NCAA/NFHS.