Rule Change Proposals

[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.

[Texas Aggie]

Dan: instead of trying to be a smart ***, read again what we both wrote. I don't care what coaches say or what their instructions are. I'm interested in creating a rule set that, regardless of when or why fouls are committed, they are discouraged as a coaching strategy. It isn't strictly at the end of the game to stop the clock, but could also discourage the foul strategy that puts people on the line instead of allowing them, for example, a layup when the offensive player has clearly beaten the defender (assuming 10+ fouls).

That's why I said not "exactly", and I stand by that.

If more of us called the intentional foul tighter and more often, I think the situation would change without a rule book change.

Fed doesn't want us to call it tighter because they specifically said that fouling to stop the clock is an acceptable strategy. Until they remove that language, its moot.

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.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that specific play (shirt grab) listed as one that should be called an intentional foul? Or, are you speaking of the idea officials use that when they are trying to foul, we are going to give it to them so as not to risk having a physical retaliation, fight, etc.? If the latter, then it still goes back to that damn quote in the rulebook, which in my opinion is 100% wrong.

[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.

[SeanFitzRef]

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.

As an addendum to this, kill the long switch also!!!!

[Old School]

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.

Agree, this mechanic needs to change. Calling official should go table side and stay 2-person. I have had many coaches say they just want to ask a question but they can't because the official is on the other side of the court. Leave the option for the official to go opposite the table if they feel they need to.

#2.) Lower the FT count from 10 to 7, this will speed up the game. You're hardly ever going to reach 10 so either remove it all together or set it to 7 or a lower number.

#3.) Clock runs in the 4th quarter if down by more than 40 points. Direct technical foul on the coach for pressing if team is ahead by more than 40 points in the 4th quarter.

#4.) Running up the score: Add a direct technical foul to the coach for running up the score or attempting to get a player to score as many points as possible (personal gain) by running up the score. This encourages team play, eliminates embarrassing of weaker teams, sends the message its a team sport and not it's all about me.

#5.) My best one. Add a rule where a coach can get a technical after the game has been completed for unprofessional conduct in the game. For example: if you win a game 175 - 25 and your star player scores 125 points. Direct technical and one game suspension for running up the score if you can prove that the coach was negligent. After further review of the game, access technical fouls accordingly. Make coaching accountable even if the game is over. Just because the game is over doesn't mean you can't get a technical for your actions in the game. I feel strongly about this at the high school level.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by Old School

Agree, this mechanic needs to change. Calling official should go table side and stay 2-person. I have had many coaches say they just want to ask a question but they can't because the official is on the other side of the court. Leave the option for the official to go opposite the table if they feel they need to.

#2.) Lower the FT count from 10 to 7, this will speed up the game. You're hardly ever going to reach 10 so either remove it all together or set it to 7 or a lower number.

#3.) Clock runs in the 4th quarter if down by more than 40 points. Direct technical foul on the coach for pressing if team is ahead by more than 40 points in the 4th quarter.

#4.) Running up the score: Add a direct technical foul to the coach for running up the score or attempting to get a player to score as many points as possible (personal gain) by running up the score. This encourages team play, eliminates embarrassing of weaker teams, sends the message its a team sport and not it's all about me.

#5.) My best one. Add a rule where a coach can get a technical after the game has been completed for unprofessional conduct in the game. For example: if you win a game 175 - 25 and your star player scores 125 points. Direct technical and one game suspension for running up the score if you can prove that the coach was negligent. After further review of the game, access technical fouls accordingly. Make coaching accountable even if the game is over. Just because the game is over doesn't mean you can't get a technical for your actions in the game. I feel strongly about this at the high school level.

Wow. Just.... wow.....

[deecee]

#3.) Clock runs in the 4th quarter if down by more than 40 points. Direct technical foul on the coach for pressing if team is ahead by more than 40 points in the 4th quarter.

#4.) Running up the score: Add a direct technical foul to the coach for running up the score or attempting to get a player to score as many points as possible (personal gain) by running up the score. This encourages team play, eliminates embarrassing of weaker teams, sends the message its a team sport and not it's all about me.

#5.) My best one. Add a rule where a coach can get a technical after the game has been completed for unprofessional conduct in the game. For example: if you win a game 175 - 25 and your star player scores 125 points. Direct technical and one game suspension for running up the score if you can prove that the coach was negligent. After further review of the game, access technical fouls accordingly. Make coaching accountable even if the game is over. Just because the game is over doesn't mean you can't get a technical for your actions in the game. I feel strongly about this at the high school level.

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.

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.

[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.

[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.

[blindzebra]

Originally Posted by Old School

Agree, this mechanic needs to change. Calling official should go table side and stay 2-person. I have had many coaches say they just want to ask a question but they can't because the official is on the other side of the court. Leave the option for the official to go opposite the table if they feel they need to.

#2.) Lower the FT count from 10 to 7, this will speed up the game. You're hardly ever going to reach 10 so either remove it all together or set it to 7 or a lower number.

#3.) Clock runs in the 4th quarter if down by more than 40 points. Direct technical foul on the coach for pressing if team is ahead by more than 40 points in the 4th quarter.

#4.) Running up the score: Add a direct technical foul to the coach for running up the score or attempting to get a player to score as many points as possible (personal gain) by running up the score. This encourages team play, eliminates embarrassing of weaker teams, sends the message its a team sport and not it's all about me.

#5.) My best one. Add a rule where a coach can get a technical after the game has been completed for unprofessional conduct in the game. For example: if you win a game 175 - 25 and your star player scores 125 points. Direct technical and one game suspension for running up the score if you can prove that the coach was negligent. After further review of the game, access technical fouls accordingly. Make coaching accountable even if the game is over. Just because the game is over doesn't mean you can't get a technical for your actions in the game. I feel strongly about this at the high school level.

How will lowering the foul counts to reach the bonus sooner speed up the game?

Pretty simple...lower count, FTs sooner, FTs stop the clock, every time the clock is stopped the game takes LONGER.

[Old School]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

How will lowering the foul counts to reach the bonus sooner speed up the game?

Pretty simple...lower count, FTs sooner, FTs stop the clock, every time the clock is stopped the game takes LONGER.

I meant instead of 10 seconds to shoot the FT, lower it to 7 seconds or some # below 10, or just do away with it all together.

[blindzebra]

Originally Posted by Old School

I meant instead of 10 seconds to shoot the FT, lower it to 7 seconds or some # below 10, or just do away with it all together.

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.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Old School

I meant instead of 10 seconds to shoot the FT, lower it to 7 seconds or some # below 10, or just do away with it all together.

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?

[JCurrie]

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.

[SMEngmann]

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.