Back In The Saddle,

Why do you need another signal when the result is going to be the same? What difference does it make if you have a foul on the player with the ball or the screener? You are going to do the same thing either way. You will not shoot FTs.

Peace

BZ, maybe I'm not getting this but the way I read it I think you're not right here.

TC ends on the shot, a TC foul cannot occur after a shot is released. The goal would count, you then shoot bonus if it applies. If the airborn shooter is the fouler then there's no basket and no bonus under fed if they leave that alone.

BTW, I bet they'll go to the ncaam signal (hand behind the head) but they need another signal for the flop. The official makes a loud "Oafff!" and jumps backwards landing on his can. :D

edit :scratches head: I just read it again & I think we are saying the same thing...but we still need the signal for the flop.


[Edited by Dan_ref on May 2nd, 2005 at 02:36 PM]

If you have a TC foul you cannot have a made basket...see continuous motion, the ball becomes dead up til the point of release.

If the try is released there is no TC foul, it's a regular old foul with FTs if the bonus is in effect.

A PC and TC foul are now the same, with the exception of a foul by an airborne shooter.

Really easy.

You can't have a made basket if the hand goes behind the head. One foul, with an exception, and one signal.;)

I for one would love to have an approved signal for the flop. The eyeroll, head shake, palm up knee to elbow get up signal would do nicely.

Yeah, we're saying the same thing I just misread what you had.

We already have a signal for that. That would be a Technical foul. :D

Peace

This is what I love about this forum. I can come here and friendly people point out the error of my ways. That saves me going out on the floor and having unfriendly people do it :D

Go figure that instaed of confusing the definitions with player control and team control we'd just rewrite it and call it an "offensive foul" Oh whoops cant do that NBA did that to make some common sense, and they still wrote it in that a player cant score while foul.


I will throw my two cents in. The current PC foul signal will be when there is an Team Control foul (offensive foul)

... What we have to remeber is that it is not a Team Control foul once the ball is in flight or gets knocked away from the defense. The area of difficulty we will have under the current rule change is the Team control foul when the ball is loose. Was it during an interrupetd dribble? was it a fumbled pass, was it oh well you can see where this is going. The NBA made this simple by creating the loose ball fooul and stating that once defense deflects it away ball is loose.

Ther will be some "loose plays" now in federation where the defense will be penalized more than the offense while they are both going after a ball.

How so?

If there is team control, by rule, during this loose ball it does not matter if the ball is loose. If the defense fouls and the bonus is in effect we shoot in either case.

I like the idea of an offensive foul...that pop you hear is MTD's head exploding...but I don't think we need to add a section to the rules about loose ball fouls.

Changing to no shots on team control creates the penalty for the defense, no foul shots, a loose ball doesn't.

Yeah, but then what we'd have to do is change the basic definition of team control. And I don't think too many people really want to do that. In the NBA, team control ends with the defensive deflection, and that's obviously not the rule in NCAA. So you'd have to re-write one of the basic rules of the game. I don't think you're going to see much support for that any time soon. JMO.

Let's take it this way, Team A has a ball and Team B bats it away (Team A still has Team control because Team B does not have control) ball rolls down the floor batted by 2 more players and A and B jump for it. A1 pushes B1, by rule this will be a team control foul- heck this may be now in the old backcourt... We call Team control...

I would rather see a loose ball foul here but as Chuck menions it would take a little bit of a rewrite

I'm jumping in a little late here, but I agree with BITS that we need two separate signals, one for the PC and one for the rest of the TC players. I agree that if we call a foul off ball, and use the PC signal, there will be too much confusion. People are accustomed to seeing that signal as meaning the ball handler. I think we need to add the punch for the off ball offensive foul.

Trust me on this one. It is not going to be a problem. It is not a problem at the college level. It will not be a problem at the HS level. College uses one signal at both levels at it is never a problem.

Peace

Juulie there won't be two seperate types of fouls it will be one. You will have TC with an exception that includes an airborne shooter.

One foul, one signal, no confusion.;)

you and Jeff must work with a lot smarter parents, players and coaches than I do. I foresee nothing but trouble if there's only one signal.

They already ask about why aren't we shooting 1 and 1 on a PC foul now.:D

Whistle, fist, vocalize whatever like illegal screen, go to table, "White 23 team control foul(with hand behind head), red ball."

What's the problem?

If there is a second signal, you think that is gonna not confuse them? The smarter ones are going to know we don't shoot with the hand behind the head signal.;)