Guarding:

A better definition of path. As it is now, if taken literally, a defender would need to run around a retreating dribbler and defend a boundary.

Closely guarded:

Screens and the count.

Beginning and continuing a visual count on a player being guarded in the lane who leaves prior to 3 seconds.

Thrown ball behind the 3 point line:

As written now, any ball thrown from behind the 3 point line that is legally touched by a defender counts 3. The intent of the rule is for a challenge at the point of release and the ball being touched on the way UP counting 3, however, as written a shot could come down well short of the goal...not falling under goaltending or BI...bounce off of a defender and go into the basket resulting in 3 points.

Timing errors:

Caused by an official's erroneous signal.

Minimum time coming off during a throw in. As written time cannot come off without definite knowledge, but you can have a throw-in, touching and OOB faster than an official can signal or the timer can react. This also falls in with fixing errors.

Causing a ball to go into the backcourt:

Our little brain-teaser about B2 deflecting a ball toward the BC that is touched by A, standing in the BC, BEFORE the ball has BC status. Did A's touching of the ball, with FC status, cause a simultaneous last to/first to touch?

I'm sure there are more, any thoughts?

I would like to see the penalty for all double/simultaneous fouls changed to 2 free throws and ball returned to point of interruption.

I'm not sure I see the problem here, unless I'm misreading the play. Isn't the NFHS rule as written clear that a try ends when it's certain to not be successfull? If so then your case would be 2 points, not 3, if I understand it.

BTW, this is a case play in the ncaa book under 4-66-1.

Yes, but the problem is that 5-2-1 says that any thrown ball (not necessarily a try) counts for 3 if it starts behind the arc and goes in the basket without touching a teammate of the thrower, an official or the floor.

So suppose A1 heaves a midcourt shot. It falls way short and bounces off B2's head (which is well below the ring). It then bounces up and into the basket. According to 5-2-1, this should count as 3 b/c it went in without touching the floor, a ref or another member of Team A.

But most of us think it should be 2 for the reasons you state. Unfortunately, the two rules contradict.

Thanks Chuck, I see.

Two free throws for who? :confused: Both teams?

Yes, but the problem is that 5-2-1 says that any thrown ball (not necessarily a try) counts for 3 if it starts behind the arc and goes in the basket without touching a teammate of the thrower, an official or the floor.

So suppose A1 heaves a midcourt shot. It falls way short and bounces off B2's head (which is well below the ring). It then bounces up and into the basket. According to 5-2-1, this should count as 3 b/c it went in without touching the floor, a ref or another member of Team A.

But most of us think it should be 2 for the reasons you state. Unfortunately, the two rules contradict. [/B][/QUOTE]Whatinthehell are you talking about? Three points?

Read 4.40.4SitB(b). It counts as 2 points.

Why 2 FTs? I can see just going to POI instead of AP. But I see no reason to shoot 2 FTs? Do you want both teams to shoot 2 FTs?

Whatinthehell are you talking about? Three points?

Read 4.40.4SitB(b). It counts as 2 points. [/B][/QUOTE]

You need to read 5.2.1.C because that one says it counts 3.;)

Read 4.40.4SitB(b). It counts as 2 points. [/B][/QUOTE]
I understand that, JR. That's why I said the rules contradict. 5-2-1 is completely unambiguous. A thrown ball that starts behind the arc is a 3 if it goes in without touching a ref, the floor, or a teammate.

Can you interpret that rule any other way for me? I don't think you can. So that gives a little problem, don't you think? 5-2-1 and 4.40.4B are both unambiguous and give directly contradictory results. That's why it's included in this thread about changes/clarifications. Either the rule needs to be re-written or the case play does.

I understand that, JR. That's why I said the rules contradict. 5-2-1 is completely unambiguous. A thrown ball that starts behind the arc is a 3 if it goes in without touching a ref, the floor, or a teammate.

Can you interpret that rule any other way for me? I don't think you can. So that gives a little problem, don't you think? 5-2-1 and 4.40.4B are both unambiguous and give directly contradictory results. That's why it's included in this thread about changes/clarifications. Either the rule needs to be re-written or the case play does. [/B][/QUOTE]Case book play 5.2.1SitC uses the words "legally touched". <b>"Legally"</b> is the key word. That means "on the way up". If it's legally touched on the way down, that means that the try has ended as per 4-40-4, and you can't score 3. I don't find it confusing personally. Just go with the purpose and intent of the rule.

Case book play 5.2.1SitC uses the words "legally touched". <b>"Legally"</b> is the key word. That means "on the way up". If it's legally touched on the way down, that means that the try has ended as per 4-40-4, and you can't score 3. I don't find it confusing personally. Just go with the purpose and intent of the rule. [/B][/QUOTE]

JR, did this thrown ball hit an official? The floor? A teammate? 5-2-1 says try or thrown ball, the problem still exists even if you don't want to acknowledge it.

JR, did this thrown ball hit an official? The floor? A teammate? 5-2-1 says try or thrown ball, the problem still exists even if you don't want to acknowledge it. [/B][/QUOTE]Naw, There's language in the book telling us when a try ends. Logically, the "throw" ends too when it doesn't have a chance to go in. That's good enough for me.

I think we need a clarification on throwins. When A1 releases the ball toward the court but B1 reaches across the boundary and touches the ball before it is over the court, is it supposed to be treated the same as if A1 was still holding the ball OOB, or do the restrictions end when the ball is released toward the court? Notice I specify toward the court.

I'd like to see time-out requests given back to the players. Hearing a "time-out," looking back to make sure it was the head coach, turning back to the play, and either a) a pass is in the air, or b) it's an interrupted dribble, or c) team b has stolen it, and now you can't grant the time-out, and now coach A is upset...make the players request the timeout...that way the coach can gripe at his players rather than the referee.

Switch the arrow as soon as the ball is handed to the thrower.

Assistant coaches should be required to wear shock collars.

Precision time should be required.

These two changes should be made together and the button for the shock collars should be on the precision time belt pack. We may occassionally mix up the buttons, so the timer should be required to start the clock whenever he hears an agonizing yelp! :D

Gotta disagree. Too many variables. If a timeout is granted at that point, when you come back the arrow is pointing in the wrong direction. Also, there are cases where the arrow doesn't get changed, such as a foul during the throwin. Trying to rectify that would be even more confusing.

Keep it the way it is, just make sure the score table knows what the heck it's supposed to do.

I think it's simpler to remove all the variables and say it gets switched when the ball is handed to the thrower. It makes more sense to me, as anything that happens during the throwin happens because of the throwin.
Timeout called during the throwin? Still A's ball and the arrow has already been switched. Foul or violation during the throwin? The arrow has done its job deciding who gets to put the ball in play.

I've used this before, but ...

2-3 is the only Rule.

All the other items are Suggestions.

Like the traffic laws in Boston.

I don't have a problem with the timeout
 

why can't you grant it?? It was requested while in player posession, you just confirmed that fact, a slow whistle is usually better than a quick one....I don't have a problem telling the opposing coach that his opponent requested the TO while in possession....I had a game this year, as the ball was getting ready to come in, I was discussing a previous call with a coach, we were about to put the ball in, so I was turning to watch the action, at this time the coach requests time out, I reach for my whistle, miss it, reach again, get it blow it, and it comes out of my mouth, I get it again and blow it, and the ball has now made it to half court....of course the opposing coach says hey he can't have a time out we have the ball...so I explain that he requested it legally....so to summarize, I don't have a problem with it the way it is :D

But you could then give the subsequent throwin to the other team, and the arrow would then be pointing the wrong way when you started play. Here's what I mean:

Arrow to A on an AP throwin. While A1 is holding the ball OOB, A2 fouls B1. B is not in the bonus. B gets the ball for a throwin due to the foul. If the arrow had been switched when the ball was first handed to A1, it would now be pointing to team B but it would still be team A's arrow. Try explaining that one at the next AP.

But as I pointed out to Dan in my first post of this thread, 5-2-1 makes it irrelevant whether it's a try or not. Any thrown ball that goes in the basket without touching the floor, a ref or a teammate is a 3.

I have no idea how you come to that conclusion "logically". Some throws never have a chance to go in; e.g., a bounce pass. Does that mean the pass was never thrown? :confused: Your conclusion just doesn't follow.

The fact is that 5-2-1 directly contradicts the case play you cite. I think the case play makes more sense, but the way things actually are, we have two diametrically opposed rulings on the same play. It needs to be clarified.

But I wouldn't have to. The foul wouldn't have occurred without the throwin granted to A by the arrow, so I have no problem giving B the next AP throwin. It's much simpler this way, because the scorers don't have to worry about whether or not to change the arrow. Always change it.

If you are going to require both of them BITS, why not just attach another button on the PTS belt that controls the shock collar! ;) However, if the clock doesn't start and you get mad and keep pushing it, see if the assisant coachs realizes it too! :D

But the throwin doesn't end with the foul, so it is still A's ball on the next AP. You'd also have to change the rule that the AP arrow changes on fouls during the throwin.

Mark,
You probably know this, but the NFHS and NCAA rules are different on this. In NFHS the defender is allowed to break the plane once the ball is released on a throw-in pass, so he could legally contact the ball on the out of bounds side of the boundary line. In NCAA play the restriction on the defender lasts until the ball breaks the plane, so there is no touching allowed on the out of bounds side either before or after the thrower releases the pass.

That is the way the rules are currently written.