Rule Change Proposals

[Old School]

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.
Chuck, we absolutely need to get this one changed. To me, this is not a big change, but a very small one. Once I give the ball to the inbounder, the team has control or should have control. I think this is a very easy one to change and the coaches would support it.

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.
What a shame, this would make it easier for us to administrator. This is also a problem waiting to happen. I notice this year they have given the NBA coaches the ability to call TO's, in particular instances of course. Probably had something to do with the Dallas Miami playoff situation last year.

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. It's a great tactic, I don't think it should change either.

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. I'm not sure I agree with the women's procedure. How do you determine which one occurred first, unfairly penalizing one of the teams? I personally wouldn't want something like this coming down to a referee's decision which could decide the game.

I thought there where some that where more important then these. I support #3, let's hope for that one.