Rule Change Proposals

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

If you did away with it all together there would be no limit to the amount of time the FTer could take.

Reduce it to 7 seconds...? Why? Do all of the FTs in your game take the full 10 seconds?

Here's another good one for Rocky to chime in...

[Old School]

Originally Posted by deecee

please dont heed any of these suggestions -- we are not the moral police -- neither should we be dictating how coaches run their team. this is the responsibility of their administration/parents/and players.

I disagree. We are the moral police. We judge what is fair and acceptable versus unacceptable. When a team is ahead by 40 and still pressing the other team up the court. For some of us, obviously not you Deecee, a moral flag goes up that says this is not right.

If any of these rules are EVER enacted I CAN guarantee I will forget them very easily. I only want to police the practice of a fair game -- not a morally upstanding game. The team getting their azzes handed to them share just as much responsibility for sucking as the team that is very good. And I can say that from coaching some teams with no skill whatsoever and getting my azz handed to me. ITS LIFE.

I disagree again. If we are talking college or the pros, okay, this makes sense. But we are talking kids in high school. Your position encourages the very thing we don't want. We don't want our children to group up without any class to themselves. To often, and I don't agree with this, but far too often we hear about coaches and referee's using bb as a tool to teach life lessons. Well, what lesson or you teaching when you run the score up on your opponent who you are obviously better then?

Here's the reason why I want to see Peyton Manning win the Superbowl. He is such a class act. Do you remember a game, I believe it was 2 years ago. Peyton had marched the Colts down the field late in the game and had a chance to score another TD. The Colts didn't need the touchdown because they had the game in hand. Peyton either threw the football OOB to the back of the endzone or he kneel the ball, I can't remember which. But it was 4th down. This is class. This is what we should be about when teaching our youths. I for one am not in the camp of leaving this responsibly solely to the school or administration. We as officials can do something about it too in case some programs goes afoul.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Here's another good one for Rocky to chime in...

How about Old School's ideas for calling technical fouls on fans? That fits in too. Rocky?

Can you give a flagrant technical foul to a fan?

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Old School

I disagree. We are the moral police.

Potential #3 here, but there are so many to choose from I hate to decide so quickly.

[Old School]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

How about Old School's ideas for calling technical fouls on fans? That fits in too. Rocky?

Can you give a flagrant technical foul to a fan?

It's already in the rules JR, no need to modify this.

[Old School]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

Yeah, I rarely call 10 seconds in the BC, so let's lower that to 7 too.

I usually hit between 3 and 4 on all my 5 second counts, so hey let's make that one 3.5 to save time as well.

Only the free throw shooter.

[blindzebra]

Originally Posted by Old School

Only the free throw shooter.

It's called sarcasm...like most things about officiating, we found something else you don't understand.

[Old School]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

It's called sarcasm...like most things about officiating, we found something else you don't understand.

Whatever....

[deecee]

right because the colts have NOT won a game by more than 7 points since Manning joined the team. you sure he wasnt trying to avoid a sack.

it is the PARENTS responsibility to teach LIFE lessons -- coaches that do and that teach morality and good sportsmanship are a bonus not a necessity that we should worry about. we enforce the rules as they pertain to each team having a fair playing field -- it is not the GOOD teams fault that they are good -- its the natural imbalance of abilities that will always dictate that -- that and PREPAREDNESS some teams just are POORLY coached -- why not T up the coach for not preparing their team.

old please post a picture of yourself in your official gear holding up a piece of paper that says basketballofficial.com and post here -- I am as open minded as they come and you have managed to make me agree with JR, Nevada, Dan and many others that I try very hard to disagree with - A cookie isnt enough for you you need a brownie.

[Old School]

Originally Posted by deecee

right because the colts have NOT won a game by more than 7 points since Manning joined the team. you sure he wasnt trying to avoid a sack. - Absolutely! Class act

it is the PARENTS responsibility to teach LIFE lessons -- coaches that do and that teach morality and good sportsmanship are a bonus not a necessity that we should worry about. In most cases you are correct. It's the extreme cases that we need jurisdiction. Running up the score on kids is just pain wrong. If you are the superior team, act like it. I can't help Deecee but think this problem is more the coaches then it is the players. It is the coaches that directs their teams to keep attacking. Are you a selfish coach? Because you got your butt kicked, you now want to drive it down the throats of other undeserving young boys and girls. A new school trying to start up a basketball program in their area and you want to come in and shove it down there throats because they are not prepared. I just don't understand this thinking.

we enforce the rules as they pertain to each team having a fair playing field (agreed) -- it is not the GOOD teams fault that they are good -- its the natural imbalance of abilities (this is where I have my problem. Children develop at different stages. Because your child has developed quicker, stronger, faster, you want your child to hold all the records. This is piss poor parenting and coaching, and you're sending the wrong message to your kids.)

why not T up the coach for not preparing their team. That's ridiculous.

I am as open minded as they come and you have managed to make me agree with JR, Nevada, Dan and many others that I try very hard to disagree with - A cookie isnt enough for you you need a brownie.

This statement doesn't surprise me after learning your position on this topic. Drive it down there throats, don't let up until the game is over. Funny how America tends to not like teams like this.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

Potential #3 here, but there are so many to choose from I hate to decide so quickly.

No, no...I'm done...check out my #3 under the OOB thread...it's perfect and fulfills the terms of my penance beautifully!!

[deecee]

last i checked america likes winners -- no matter the cost.

I think OS is trying to form a group of super officials that do everything -- from officiate, to coach, to play the game, to manage the game/stands/fans/table, to do the scorekeeping, to man the cameras for all the televised games, to sell the popcorn

i just have one question is it going to be a 2-man or 3-man super crew that will do all this?

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by ChuckElias

This week, I received a form for making rule change suggestions to the FED. Anybody can get the form and make a suggestion, I guess. But I happen to know a member of the rules committee, so he sends me the form directly. If you have a rule that you think should be changed and you would like me to send it on to the committee, here's your chance!

To be submitted, the change has to be submitted exactly as you think it should read in the book. Also, they want us to note exactly what part of the existing rule would have to be deleted, if necessary. Finally (enough hoops to jump through? ), they ask to note other rules and cases affected by the proposed change.

So it's not enough to say, "I'd like to see them go to the POI for a single technical foul". It needs to be written up precisely as it would appear in next year's rulebook.

I got a tremendous response last year when I asked for case book play proposals, so I hope that you have some ideas to pass along.

Current Rule:
"Rule 4 Section 29 - Kicking the ball is intentionally striking it with any part of the leg or foot."

Proposed Change:
"Rule 4 Section 29 - Kicking the ball is intentionally contacting it with any part of the leg or foot."

Affected Case Plays:
Change title of "4.29 Situation" to "4.29 Situation A."
Addition of "4.29 Situation B: A1 is on the floor with the ball lodged between the upper part of the legs. B1 attempts to gain possession of the ball by placing two hands firmly on the ball; however, A1 applies vice-like force with the upper legs, which prevents B1 from gaining possession of the ball. RULING: A1 has committed a kicking violation. The intent of this rule is to prevent a player from gaining an advantage by using any part of the leg. Although A1 did not strike the ball with any part of the leg, the player did gain an illegal advantage by intentionally contacting the ball with the leg(s). (4-29)"

Thank you, Chuck.

[Old School]

Originally Posted by deecee

last i checked america likes winners -- no matter the cost.

No doubt, it's the "no matter the cost" that scares me.

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by ChuckElias

This week, I received a form for making rule change suggestions to the FED. Anybody can get the form and make a suggestion, I guess. But I happen to know a member of the rules committee, so he sends me the form directly. If you have a rule that you think should be changed and you would like me to send it on to the committee, here's your chance!

To be submitted, the change has to be submitted exactly as you think it should read in the book. Also, they want us to note exactly what part of the existing rule would have to be deleted, if necessary. Finally (enough hoops to jump through? ), they ask to note other rules and cases affected by the proposed change.

So it's not enough to say, "I'd like to see them go to the POI for a single technical foul". It needs to be written up precisely as it would appear in next year's rulebook.

I got a tremendous response last year when I asked for case book play proposals, so I hope that you have some ideas to pass along.

Change Basic Procedures and Mechanics - Two Officials - Fouls - 233 (completely) to read:
233. Free Official:
a. Freeze field of vision to observe players until the reporting official turns to observe players.
b. Ignore the ball while the foul is being reported.
c. Anticipate anything unusual relative to the next play, such as, but not limited to, false double or double fouls, one of two shots, change of side, etc.
d. After the foul is reported and the reporting official is observing players from new position, while keepinig the players in view, secure the ball and move to the proper position for the ensuing play.
e. Do not run through the players.
f. If free throw(s) is to be taken, insure the proper free thrower is on the line.

Change Basic Procedures and Mechanics - Two Officials - Fouls - 234 (completely) to read:
234. Switching Principles:
a. The official who calls the foul remains as Trail.
b. There is no switch on a foul in the backcourt going to the frontcourt.

Thanks again, Chuck.