Rule Change Proposals

[WhistlesAndStripes]

How about a "sideline warning" for coaches out of their box, similar to the football rule. First time it's a warning. Any additional, technical foul. Maybe even make it one of the "formal warning" items, although, I would make it a warning of it's own.

[tjones1]

In Illinois we had a warning last year, it was removed this year and is now an automatic T.

I think I would like to see team control during a throw-in.

[Camron Rust]

Change team control to include a throwin for the purposes of the team control foul...just like the NCAA rule.

[Jurassic Referee]

Who's the new guy that started this thread?

Wait a minute......

Is it?

Could it be?

Damn, I thought we got rid of him permanently. Sumb!tch has made more comebacks now than George Foreman!

[refnrev]

I think it is a true Chuck Elias sighting!

[Texas Aggie]

With the way the game is going, contact and rough play wise, I'd be in favor of changing the bonus situation and eliminating the 1 and 1. 2 shots at the 7th foul, and 2 shots plus the ball at the 10th foul.

Fed needs to drop the idea that fouling to stop the clock is a legitimate coaching strategy. I know its been around forever, but the thought of essentially saying "it is a legitimate coaching strategy to break the rules if you think it will give you an advantage, as long as you are willing to pay for it" is ridiculous.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

With the way the game is going, contact and rough play wise, I'd be in favor of changing the bonus situation and eliminating the 1 and 1. 2 shots at the 7th foul, and 2 shots plus the ball at the 10th foul.

Fed needs to drop the idea that fouling to stop the clock is a legitimate coaching strategy. I know its been around forever, but the thought of essentially saying "it is a legitimate coaching strategy to break the rules if you think it will give you an advantage, as long as you are willing to pay for it" is ridiculous.

Why? I think it's perfectly acceptable and has always been in basketball.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

With the way the game is going, contact and rough play wise, I'd be in favor of changing the bonus situation and eliminating the 1 and 1. 2 shots at the 7th foul, and 2 shots plus the ball at the 10th foul.

Fed needs to drop the idea that fouling to stop the clock is a legitimate coaching strategy. I know its been around forever, but the thought of essentially saying "it is a legitimate coaching strategy to break the rules if you think it will give you an advantage, as long as you are willing to pay for it" is ridiculous.

The did that already.

It was such a huge success they changed it back a couple of years later.

I have an idea though. Let's not have ANY changes next year. None at all, leave everything the way it was, only change the year and the committee members.

Now that would be new.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

With the way the game is going, contact and rough play wise, I'd be in favor of changing the bonus situation and eliminating the 1 and 1. 2 shots at the 7th foul, and 2 shots plus the ball at the 10th foul.

Fed needs to drop the idea that fouling to stop the clock is a legitimate coaching strategy. I know its been around forever, but the thought of essentially saying "it is a legitimate coaching strategy to break the rules if you think it will give you an advantage, as long as you are willing to pay for it" is ridiculous.

Why? It's used in other sports. Baseball has the intentional walk; they don't give the batter two bases after the 8th walk. Football teams will often take a delay of game penalty to use more time and give their punter more space to kick.

[finnref]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

With the way the game is going, contact and rough play wise, I'd be in favor of changing the bonus situation and eliminating the 1 and 1. 2 shots at the 7th foul, and 2 shots plus the ball at the 10th foul.

Fed needs to drop the idea that fouling to stop the clock is a legitimate coaching strategy. I know its been around forever, but the thought of essentially saying "it is a legitimate coaching strategy to break the rules if you think it will give you an advantage, as long as you are willing to pay for it" is ridiculous.

If more of us called the intentional foul tighter and more often, I think the situation would change without a rule book change. I have seen the offensive player make a good play in avoiding the defender trying to foul him and the defender just reachinng and touching his shirt as he dribbles by. He should get the shots AND the ball is this type situation in my opinion. I found this hard to do with all my partner calling it the other way. Retired now so I can just watch.

[GoodwillRef]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

With the way the game is going, contact and rough play wise, I'd be in favor of changing the bonus situation and eliminating the 1 and 1. 2 shots at the 7th foul, and 2 shots plus the ball at the 10th foul.

Fed needs to drop the idea that fouling to stop the clock is a legitimate coaching strategy. I know its been around forever, but the thought of essentially saying "it is a legitimate coaching strategy to break the rules if you think it will give you an advantage, as long as you are willing to pay for it" is ridiculous.

I hope you are willing to work 3 hour games. Some teams are really bad and foul a lot and you could have 10 fouls early in the 4th if not late in 3rd! This would be completely stupid!

[ChuckElias]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Who's the new guy that started this thread?

You know, I almost threw in a pre-emptive "shut up" at the beginning of the thread, b/c I knew you or Dan would have some nice welcome for me.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by ChuckElias

You know, I almost threw in a pre-emptive "shut up" at the beginning of the thread, b/c I knew you or Dan would have some nice welcome for me.

Welcome you? Why, have you been gone?

[Terrapins Fan]

get rid of the 10 second count during the FT, I have never seen a violation called in 51 years.