Five Fouls Not Enough?

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

This is the main reason why I favor a rule change to eliminate the 1 and 1, go to 2 shots after the 6th foul, and 2 shots and the ball after the 10th foul.

Two shots and the ball is far too punitive.

[AFHusker]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Two shots and the ball is far too punitive.

It would put an end to the strategic fouling at the end of the game(with 10 fouls or more).

[Red_Killian]

I may be off base here but I seem to remember here in Minnesota (yes we are the state who bucks the Fed with 18 min halves, monitor usage at State Tournament games, visitors wear white) a number of years ago, before I started officiating, a player could stay in the game after his 5th foul. Subsequent fouls by that player resulted in 2 free throws plus the ball (l don't remember but I think it was at the division line). I don't recall there was limit on how many additional fouls a player could get and keep playing as long as his team was willing to pay the price.

I admit I am somewhat vague on the details, and exactly when this was used and how long it continued. This was definitely back in my fanboy days so I plead fan ignorance on the exact rule. Any old-time MN officials recall the details better than me?

[mplagrow]

Originally Posted by Red_Killian

a number of years ago, before I started officiating, a player could stay in the game after his 5th foul. Subsequent fouls by that player resulted in 2 free throws plus the ball (l don't remember but I think it was at the division line). I don't recall there was limit on how many additional fouls a player could get and keep playing as long as his team was willing to pay the price.

I was a high school statistician, and my team went to state in 1987 when they first implemented that rule. It was perfect for us, because we had a 6'8 center who otherwise would have fouled out often. There was no limit to the number of fouls, every foul past #5 was basically assessed as a technical. This was the same year the three-point line was introduced in Minnesota.

It lasted for maybe two or three seasons, until some girl got whacked hard by a girl who was over the limit. She ended up pretty seriously hurt, at least a concussion. At that point, the powers that be decided that RULES ARE THERE FOR A REASON!

[Mregor]

Originally Posted by AFHusker

It would put an end to the strategic fouling at the end of the game(with 10 fouls or more).

It is an acceptable strategy. Why get rid of it?

Mregor

[AFHusker]

Originally Posted by Mregor

It is an acceptable strategy. Why get rid of it?

Mregor

I didn't mean for it to sound like I was saying to get rid of it, but I can see how it could be taken that way. I should have put "plus" before anything else to make it clear since I was responding to the previous comment that 2 shots and the ball would be to punitive.

[Red_Killian]

mplagrow, thanks for verifying my memory was correct.