The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #46 (permalink)  
Old Sat Oct 26, 2019, 12:06pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 11,790
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigCat View Post
I think 4-12-2d should be removed. Then a 4-12-7 created to say” for foul purposes only, there shall be team control when ball at disposal of team for throwin until player control obtained inbounds.

Something like that to make it read better than it does now....
You could leave team control out of it entirely....no need to say there is team control at all.

Just like the "player control foul" says it applies to airborne shooters even though there is no "player control", you could simply say "team control fouls" apply to throwins even though there is no "team control".

They could even create a new type of foul that would apply to "offensive" players when there is no team control. It would apply to airborne shooters and throwing team players on throwins until team control is secured.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com

Last edited by Camron Rust; Sat Oct 26, 2019 at 12:08pm.
Reply With Quote
  #47 (permalink)  
Old Sat Oct 26, 2019, 01:42pm
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 17,932
Bigfoot ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
... create a new type of foul that would apply to "offensive" players when there is no team control. It would apply to airborne shooters and throwing team players on throwins until team control is secured.
The mythical, infamous "offensive foul".

Often talked about by television commentators but never actually observed, kind of like Bigfoot, but even more elusive.

__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

“I was in prison and you came to visit me.” (Matthew 25:36)

Last edited by BillyMac; Sat Oct 26, 2019 at 05:18pm.
Reply With Quote
  #48 (permalink)  
Old Sat Oct 26, 2019, 04:15pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,518
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
You could leave team control out of it entirely....no need to say there is team control at all.

Just like the "player control foul" says it applies to airborne shooters even though there is no "player control", you could simply say "team control fouls" apply to throwins even though there is no "team control".

They could even create a new type of foul that would apply to "offensive" players when there is no team control. It would apply to airborne shooters and throwing team players on throwins until team control is secured.
Yes, create a throw-in foul category and revert to the old NFHS team control rule.
Reply With Quote
  #49 (permalink)  
Old Sat Oct 26, 2019, 10:54pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 513
Quote:
Originally Posted by rwodar View Post
This also doesn’t make sense. other than a field goal or free throw attempt There is NEVER a live ball situation where team control does not exist ...
The jump ball before a player gains control.

Apologies if anyone addressed this aspect of his claims already, but I didn't see it in the thread.
Reply With Quote
  #50 (permalink)  
Old Sat Oct 26, 2019, 11:05pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Rockville,MD
Posts: 729
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
Overkill. The shot clock has absolutely nothing to do with this. There are many ways to fix that, all of which don't take the equivalent of using dynamite to kill a mosquito.
With the shot clock, team control begins once a team has possession of the ball (or is entitled to possession by having the ball at its disposal). Since a team has control of the ball either inbounds or at its disposal, there is no reason to artificially create 2 different types of team control as NFHS rules mistakenly did. Because a team would already have control.once it has (or is entitled to) possession, and the shot clock is reset to its full value, having a shot clock would ease administration of the backcourt count rule, since team control.would not change unless player control.changes on the court or a shot is released, keeping in line with the normal interpretation of player control.

If the shot clock does not emerge, I would support creating a throw-in foul category as an exception to the bonus rules, so that there are not 2 different types of team control.
Reply With Quote
  #51 (permalink)  
Old Sun Oct 27, 2019, 11:55am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 11,790
Quote:
Originally Posted by ilyazhito View Post
With the shot clock, team control begins once a team has possession of the ball (or is entitled to possession by having the ball at its disposal). Since a team has control of the ball either inbounds or at its disposal, there is no reason to artificially create 2 different types of team control as NFHS rules mistakenly did. Because a team would already have control.once it has (or is entitled to) possession, and the shot clock is reset to its full value, having a shot clock would ease administration of the backcourt count rule, since team control.would not change unless player control.changes on the court or a shot is released, keeping in line with the normal interpretation of player control.

If the shot clock does not emerge, I would support creating a throw-in foul category as an exception to the bonus rules, so that there are not 2 different types of team control.
Shot clock still has NOTHING to do with all of those things. You could have all of those things simply by stating team control exists for all purposes when the throwin begins. They don't want that. Adding a shot clock to make those things happen is entirely unnecessary. They could make those things happen without a shot clock...and probably more easily than adding a shot clock.

You're making it a lot more complicated than it needs to be....the only wanted a way to have no FTs for fouls that occur during throw-in activity.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #52 (permalink)  
Old Sun Oct 27, 2019, 09:36pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Mentor, Ohio
Posts: 499
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
You could leave team control out of it entirely....no need to say there is team control at all.

Just like the "player control foul" says it applies to airborne shooters even though there is no "player control", you could simply say "team control fouls" apply to throwins even though there is no "team control".

They could even create a new type of foul that would apply to "offensive" players when there is no team control. It would apply to airborne shooters and throwing team players on throwins until team control is secured.
Not sure this would be a good rule. If I understand the idea correctly, this would enable the team that is behind to commit offensive fouls immediately after the release of each of their shot attempts causing the clock to stop while the try is still airborne, the attempt still counts if it goes, the opposing team would get no free throws just like the player control foul even though there is no player control. Plus the opponents would likely have an end line throw in allowing the team that is behind to set up their press.
Reply With Quote
  #53 (permalink)  
Old Sun Oct 27, 2019, 10:24pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Rockville,MD
Posts: 729
Either adopt a throw-in foul as a special category, so that the opponents of the team throwing the ball in do not shoot free throws, or have team control be consistent across all purposes (fouls AND violations). The artificial separation of team control on throw-ins for the purpose of fouls, but not for other purposes, has created controversy and confusion among officials where before there was none.
Reply With Quote
  #54 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 28, 2019, 12:49am
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 28,953
This is not even that complicated. The rule is poorly written for the technical crowd, but it is clear what the rule is there to do. It has nothing to do with violations anyway.

Peace
__________________
"When the phone does not ring, the assignor is calling."
--Black

Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #55 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 28, 2019, 11:15am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 11,790
Quote:
Originally Posted by billyu2 View Post
Not sure this would be a good rule. If I understand the idea correctly, this would enable the team that is behind to commit offensive fouls immediately after the release of each of their shot attempts causing the clock to stop while the try is still airborne, the attempt still counts if it goes, the opposing team would get no free throws just like the player control foul even though there is no player control. Plus the opponents would likely have an end line throw in allowing the team that is behind to set up their press.
I agree. I was not intending to comment on tries being in the air. Team control would still end on the release of a try. I only intended to talk about the way to cover the game from when the throwin is over (ball touched) until team control is secured.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #56 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 28, 2019, 11:17am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 11,790
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge View Post
This is not even that complicated. The rule is poorly written for the technical crowd, but it is clear what the rule is there to do. It has nothing to do with violations anyway.

Peace
Yet, several times a year, it needs to be explained to someone. Thus, it is a problem and should be cleaned up.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #57 (permalink)  
Old Mon Oct 28, 2019, 11:30am
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 28,953
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
Yet, several times a year, it needs to be explained to someone. Thus, it is a problem and should be cleaned up.
I do not disagree with it being cleaned up. But we also have people that try to turn the discussion into something it should not be or try to make more out of the confusion. The bottom line, the throw-in Team Control portion of the rule is only about a foul situation, not a violation restriction. Many rules like this have multiple elements to them, so this is not new. And people in those cases also have to have those things explained to them as well, that does not mean we need an entire rules change to make it more understood. This rule needs a wording correction most of all.

Peace
__________________
"When the phone does not ring, the assignor is calling."
--Black

Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Throw In NFHS game Stripes33 Basketball 19 Thu Dec 07, 2017 02:09pm
NFHS throw in question UNIgiantslayers Basketball 9 Tue Oct 31, 2017 12:50am
New NFHS Free Throw Rule. Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. Basketball 60 Fri Sep 19, 2014 09:42am
Free Throw Question (NFHS) Raymond Basketball 10 Wed Oct 30, 2013 06:08am
AP throw-in (yes again) / NFHS vs NCAA eyezen Basketball 6 Wed Oct 17, 2007 12:31pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:35am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1