The Official Forum - Rule Change Proposals

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)

- Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)

- - Rule Change Proposals (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/31259-rule-change-proposals.html)

Something that I've always wanted to see be adopted is the FIBA rules on Basket Interference. Where once the ball makes contact with the rim, all bets are off.

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve33

Something that I've always wanted to see be adopted is the FIBA rules on Basket Interference. Where once the ball makes contact with the rim, all bets are off.

You must be joking:) IMHO it's one of the dumbest thing they made. Reaching within the basket and touching the ball after it has hit the ring is a simple violation, not BI :eek: Yes, that's the rule. :mad:

Ciao

Rule 3 Section 5

Eyeglasses are permitted but must be held securely in place with a band designed soley for this purpose. The band must attach to each earpiece of the eyeglasses and fit snuggly around the back of the head.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcdanrd

Sorta like contact cement?;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zoochy

Change the Mechanics in 2 man officials. Have the official that reports the foul stay at table side. Thus making it similar with 3 man mechanics.
Not all varsity games in St. Louis, MO use 3 officials. There have been times that my partner, in a 2 man game, has stayed at table side after reporting the foul. I just made my adjustment in administering the Free Throw and we chatted about this proceedure after the game.

That is the international mechanic. With 2 officials, the calling official goes trail when play is staying in the front court. When play is going the other way, the calling official always becomes the new lead.

My rule change suggestions:

1) Adopt a shot clock in all states

2) Stop clock on all made baskets in the last minute of the game (or at the very least, the last 10 seconds of the 4th quarter/OT)

rationale: teams should not be able to "run out the clock." Very difficult play to officiate in terms of determining when the ball is "at the disposal" of the thrower in for the 5 second count.

3) Eliminate the intentional foul definition and replace with more specific definitions (flagrant fouls 1 and 2) as well as clear path foul and away from the play foul.

rationale: if FED is gonna allow fouling as a legitimate strategy, they cannot have "intentional foul" in the rulebook. Adding these other definitions breaks down the types of current "intentional fouls" and thus makes them easier to officiate. Plus, as an added bonus, it eliminates the argument "he was going for the ball" from the coach's lexicon.

4) Point of Interruption on technicals

5) Change the penalty for slapping the backboard to basket interference when the ball is in the cylinder.

6) Expand the coaches box from 28 foot mark to endline, or eliminate it entirely

rationale: the way the currently adopted box is makes it too difficult for most officials to manage the bench. Let the coach use the sideline to coach his team, if he can't handle that, he should have no box, eliminate the half measures.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SMEngmann

My rule change suggestions:
...
3) Eliminate the intentional foul definition and replace with more specific definitions (flagrant fouls 1 and 2) as well as clear path foul and away from the play foul.
...
6) Expand the coaches box from 28 foot mark to endline, or eliminate it entirely

rationale: the way the currently adopted box is makes it too difficult for most officials to manage the bench. Let the coach use the sideline to coach his team, if he can't handle that, he should have no box, eliminate the half measures.

FIBA did #3: we now call them "unsportsmanlike fouls"; maybe the name is terrible, but it does not convey any idea of "intentionality", which is not a criterion to call them, as any "stop clock foul" could be deemed intentional.

#6: We have the coaching box from the endline to 5 meters (16' 5"; aren't metric measures simpler?:)) from the division line. No particular problem. And no, after a T the coach doesn't lose any coaching box privilege.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcdanrd

Am I missing something? My book has nothing about eyeglasses in this part.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mj

Am I missing something? My book has nothing about eyeglasses in this part.

I think that's what would make it a rule change. :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

I think that's what would make it a rule change. :D

Alrighty then...

What kind of chance is there to have FED adopt that the opponents of the free thrower can stand ON the 12" block (closest to the baseline) during a FT? (Same as NCAA)

And end all restrictions on the release?

Mine are:

Expand team control to include at disposal of throw-in OOB

Stop clock on made baskets during last minute of second half (see next one) and OT

Change to 16 minute halves

No timeout by head coach unless ball is dead

Have certified table crews

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoachP

Approximately zero, imo. The rules have gone from "rim" to "release" back to "rim" in the past several years. And, FED is "happy" with the results from some study a couple of years ago about how meny rebounds each team gets. So, I think this would be a dead issue for at least a couple more years.

Quote:

Let the coach use the sideline to coach his team, if he can't handle that, he should have no box, eliminate the half measures.

This logic was used when they adopted the coaching box in the '90s. It was said then that if Fed gave them some leeway to get up and move around a little, they wouldn't have any latitude to argue they should move around more. Obviously, many if not most coaches move around much more and create a problem for us in trying to manage it.

If we adopt the NCAA box, they'll be from end line to table and complain when we try to get them back in the box as they do now.

With that said, I think the box should be the length of the bench (set in distance) and no more.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChuckElias

Just thought I'd give you a progress report. I had the opportunity to work with a member of the FED rules committee last weekend. We worked a college game together. I gave him the list that we'd compiled and he commented on a few of the proposals.

3) Expand definition of team control to include holding the ball OOB for a throw-in.

As we know, the FED doesn't like to make big exceptions or changes to long-standing rules. And that's what this one would require. He doesn't see much chance for this one.

5) TO shall not be granted to a head coach unless the ball is dead and the clock is stopped.

This would be like "putting the genie back in the bottle", according to him. Just not going to happen, until all the members of the committee are officials. The coaches like it too much. It's never going away.

6) Violation for the inbounder delaying his return to the court.

The rules committee actually wanted this as part of the rule change a couple years ago. But the FED itself didn't like it. Since it's a T for a player to delay his return during a normal play or after a TO, they thought it should also remain a T if he delays his return following a throw-in. They didn't like the idea of two different penalties for exactly the same infraction, just b/c they happen at different times. So I don't think this one will fly.

8) Add "gray shirt" to approved uniform for officials.

No support for it at all on the committee. In the past, they proposed it as a State Adoption, but the FED itself said that there are already enough State Adoptions and didn't want any more. This is also why you will never see the shot clock as a State Adoption. Either everyone is going to use it, or no one is.

14) Revise sweatband requirements.

Not going to happen.

15) Prohibit substitutions after the final FT of a multiple throw.

Another one that has been discussed, but the coaches like it too much. It's a tactic that the coaches will not give up.

16) Change the blarge procedure to eliminate the double foul penalty.

He was unaware of the women's NCAA procedure. When I explained it, he asked, "What if they can't agree whose call it was?" So I'm not sure if that one will fly either, although I personally hope it does.

The others, he didn't really comment on. Just thought I'd pass it along to everybody.

I really don't see adding the word inbounds to 3 seconds, closely guarded and 10 seconds backcourt is that major of a change for team control during a throw-in to take place.