The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 15, 2008, 02:36pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 9,466
Send a message via AIM to rainmaker
Quote:
Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle
I think he means "committed by" the offensive team.
Yea, probably, but I just want to be sure. I'm a word person, and in a verbal medium, word choice is important. I'm gonna just hammer away at it.

If he does mean "committed by the offensive team", then I disagree with him. Losing possession is the only penalty that can be inflicted, especially since we don't give shots on TC fouls. How is that not fair?
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 15, 2008, 02:42pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 1,342
I would like the Fed's to come in line with the NCAA when it comes to hair control devices or headbands:

Be single soldi-colored, similar to the dominant color of the game jersey, white, black or beige.

Team control: A team shall be in control when: When a player of that team has disposal of the ball for a throw-in.
__________________
truerookie

Last edited by truerookie; Tue Jan 15, 2008 at 02:46pm.
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 15, 2008, 02:44pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,674
I like the NCAA FT.

TC on throw-ins.

Make failing to enter after legally being OOB a violation instead of a T.

One mechanic change would be making the fist the signal for all "offensive" control fouls...TC and PC.
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 15, 2008, 02:44pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 9,466
Send a message via AIM to rainmaker
Quote:
Originally Posted by truerookie
I would like the Fed's to come in line with the NCAA when it comes to hair control devices or headbands: thus, capturing the thin devices currently in use that does not fall within the rules. Thanks
You really are masochistic.
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 15, 2008, 02:50pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by rainmaker
Yea, probably, but I just want to be sure. I'm a word person, and in a verbal medium, word choice is important. I'm gonna just hammer away at it.

If he does mean "committed by the offensive team", then I disagree with him. Losing possession is the only penalty that can be inflicted, especially since we don't give shots on TC fouls. How is that not fair?
Juulie, if you consider his post sort of a "modest proposal" in response to Padgett's suggestion, it makes more sense.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #21 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 15, 2008, 02:51pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,191
I'll offer mine again, as well.

Switch the AP arrow as soon as you hand the ball to the thrower for the throwin.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 15, 2008, 02:52pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by truerookie
I would like the Fed's to come in line with the NCAA when it comes to hair control devices or headbands:

Be single soldi-colored, similar to the dominant color of the game jersey, white, black or beige.
Another one asking for homework.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 15, 2008, 03:12pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,221
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Padgett
If there's a technical against the defensive team, they lose only two shots because they didn't have possession in the first place. This means the severity of penalty for a technical is different for a team with the ball vs. a team without the ball. The implication is that it is a worse offense to commit a technical if you have the ball than if you don't. That's illogical.
Who cares? If it helps to keep half the coaches quiet, then I'm all for it.

It's just an additional penalty that was implemented to maybe make coaches think about it before they start yapping. I've already run into a few coaches that were smart enough to delay their b!tching until their team lost possession.
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 15, 2008, 03:20pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Beaver, PA
Posts: 481
Here is my offering!

9-9-3

A player from the team not in control may legally jump from his/her frontcourt, secure the ball with both feet off the floor and return to the floor with one or both feet in the backcourt. The player may make a normal landing and it makes no difference whether the first foot down is in the frontcourt or backcourt.

Eliminated (defensive player or during a jump ball or throw-in) from rule. This would also change the questionable interpretations on the NFHS website (6 and 7).

************

Change interpretation 10 from NFHS website to be NOT a violation. Ruling, The Catch/Touch by A2 in the backcourt is valid since B1 was the last to touch the ball.

If NFHS allows this interpretation to remain unchanged, Then: A1 is dribbling in his backcourt 5 feet from the division line. B1 dives from As frontcourt and while airborne taps the ball off of A1s leg. Ruling: Team A has committed a backcourt violation. Yuck!
__________________
I only wanna know ...
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 15, 2008, 03:28pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: PA
Posts: 446
Quote:
Originally Posted by truerookie
I would like the Fed's to come in line with the NCAA when it comes to hair control devices or headbands:

Be single soldi-colored, similar to the dominant color of the game jersey, white, black or beige.

Team control: A team shall be in control when: When a player of that team has disposal of the ball for a throw-in.

I actually agree with this. Switching between NCAA-W and NFHS, especially NFHS-girls, if everything around the head has to be one color for the entire team, that makes it really easy on us if they're making us already be fashion police.
__________________
I know God would never give me more than I could handle, I just wish he wouldn't trust me so much.
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 15, 2008, 03:30pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 45
I agree with refneck.

Only players who have entered the court, legally, can innitiate a time out.
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 15, 2008, 03:42pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,161
1. One of: either eliminate the 1 and 1 and go with 2 shots at 7 fouls and 2 shots plus the ball at 10 fouls, OR, allow an option to decline free throws and take the ball out of bounds for any (or non-shooting fouls) fouls where free throws are awarded.

2. Mandate that a coach must use a visual timeout signal and/or have the coach only call timeout during a stop in play.

3. 2 halves instead of 4 quarters.

4. Require a technical foul to start the game against the ACTUAL home team for all gyms that are not properly marked with a coaching box -- tournaments excluded.

5. Go back to allowing lane restrictions to end on a free throw on the release. Current rule is difficult to enforce and isn't being enforced uniformly.
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 15, 2008, 03:55pm
certified Hot Mom tester
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: only in my own mind, such as it is
Posts: 12,918
Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Refneck
6. Only active players may request a timeout
So the players that just stand around can't request one?
__________________
Yom HaShoah
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 15, 2008, 04:05pm
certified Hot Mom tester
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: only in my own mind, such as it is
Posts: 12,918
Exclamation

Quote:
Originally Posted by rainmaker
Losing possession is the only penalty that can be inflicted, especially since we don't give shots on TC fouls.
Y'know, Juulie - ya' gotta point here. I never took the inequity that far. The penalty for a common foul before the bonus does penalize an offensive team who commits one more than a defensive team who does. Then after the bonus, it switches the other way around - kind of. Perhaps the NF should rethink (assuming there was ever a "think" in the first place) the entire foul penalty situation.
__________________
Yom HaShoah
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 15, 2008, 04:13pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 9,466
Send a message via AIM to rainmaker
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Padgett
Y'know, Juulie - ya' gotta point here. I never took the inequity that far. The penalty for a common foul before the bonus does penalize an offensive team who commits one more than a defensive team who does. Then after the bonus, it switches the other way around - kind of. Perhaps the NF should rethink (assuming there was ever a "think" in the first place) the entire foul penalty situation.
Or perhaps we should just encourage the kids to stop fouling so the inequities are erased.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ASA Rule Change Proposals for 2008 IRISHMAFIA Softball 21 Sat Oct 13, 2007 11:16pm
Rule Change Proposals ChuckElias Basketball 124 Sun Mar 11, 2007 03:24am
Men's Basketball proposals? mick Basketball 24 Thu May 08, 2003 06:09am
Let's change this rule Mark Padgett Basketball 7 Wed Jun 27, 2001 01:43pm
Did they change the rule? kschau Basketball 4 Thu Dec 14, 2000 04:36pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:29am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1