The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Rule Change Proposals for '08 (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/41070-rule-change-proposals-08-a.html)

ChuckElias Tue Jan 15, 2008 09:35am

Rule Change Proposals for '08
 
Hey everybody. It's that time once again when rule change proposals are being submitted. I've been asked for some thoughts on this, and so I thought I'd ask all of you if there are any changes that you'd like to propose (and which I could pass on).

If you have a proposal, please write it out as it would appear in the book and list any other rules or cases that the change would affect. (The affected rules and cases must be included in the rule change submission.)

I'm interested to see if Dan's proposal this year is the same as last year's. :)

Dan_ref Tue Jan 15, 2008 09:54am

Yes it is.

Dan_ref Tue Jan 15, 2008 10:55am

OK, because he asked me again in an email on a completely different subject I'll post here what I just told him in my response...

Quote:

Actually I'm kinda liking the ncaa line up on FTs and the fed should complete the move to include team control during a throw-in, but not enough to continue lobbying that at least one organization leave their rules alone for one year. That's all I ask, 1 year....

Gimlet25id Tue Jan 15, 2008 11:33am

Rule 3-4 addition

The color, style, and design of all teammates' game jerseys and game pants shall be alike.

Would have to add a case book play to cover illegal pants.

This would match up the FED to the NCAA rule on pants.

Adam Tue Jan 15, 2008 12:03pm

You're wanting to add uniform requirements.

As a former coworker used to say, "That's like asking for homework."

Back In The Saddle Tue Jan 15, 2008 12:03pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gimlet25id
Rule 3-4 addition

The color, style, and design of all teammates' game jerseys and game pants shall be alike.

Would have to add a case book play to cover illegal pants.

This would match up the FED to the NCAA rule on pants.

Hmmm, not sure I actually care if their pants match. And I surely don't need another thing to add to the list of fashion policing issues we already have to endure.

Mark Padgett Tue Jan 15, 2008 12:42pm

I still think we should eliminate possession as part of the penalty for a technical foul. We should always use POI. Think of it this way - if there's a technical against the offensive team, they lose two shots and possession. 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.

I realize that if a technical occurs during a time of no team control and we're using POI, we would have to use the AP arrow instead according to the current rule, but that should be changed to treat POI like the NBA rule. That means that if a technical is called, you "freeze" the game, take the shots, then resume the game where you left off. I think that makes sense, since a technical is something that takes place "outside" the normal playing of the game.

However, I do not support changing the penalty from two shots to one shot, like the NBA.

Another rule change I would like to see is a requirement for coaches to always have their mouths taped shut during games. This would be an advantage for everyone, including the players. :p

cmathews Tue Jan 15, 2008 01:10pm

oh mark mark mark
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett
I still think we should eliminate possession as part of the penalty for a technical foul. We should always use POI. Think of it this way - if there's a technical against the offensive team, they lose two shots and possession. 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.

I realize that if a technical occurs during a time of no team control and we're using POI, we would have to use the AP arrow instead according to the current rule, but that should be changed to treat POI like the NBA rule. That means that if a technical is called, you "freeze" the game, take the shots, then resume the game where you left off. I think that makes sense, since a technical is something that takes place "outside" the normal playing of the game.

However, I do not support changing the penalty from two shots to one shot, like the NBA.

Another rule change I would like to see is a requirement for coaches to always have their mouths taped shut during games. This would be an advantage for everyone, including the players. :p

If we use your last rule change wouldn't that nullify the need for the other one?? LOL...and then there are the uniform requiremets with tape, does it match the color of the jersey/sport coat/sweatshirt etc....oh my :D

Gimlet25id Tue Jan 15, 2008 01:20pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle
Hmmm, not sure I actually care if their pants match. And I surely don't need another thing to add to the list of fashion policing issues we already have to endure.

I'm sure it wouldn't take any extra effort to ensure that the pants match in color since you already are looking @ the uniforms already.

I have never actually seen a team play with pants that were a different color then their jersey's.It just seems like a contradiction to insure that the headband/sweatbands, undershirts are the correct color but then not have anything in place that says the pants have to match.

Furthermore I'm sure most retailers who are selling uniforms already make them the same color already.

It just doesn't make since that we don't have the phraseology in the FED's rule book that requires the color to match like the NCAA RB.

As JR had pointed out in another thread, the FED RB currently would allow all players of a team to wear different colored pants/shorts as long as their jersey's match in color. Why not make it so that both have to match? :)

JRutledge Tue Jan 15, 2008 01:32pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gimlet25id
I'm sure it wouldn't take any extra effort to ensure that the pants match in color since you already are looking @ the uniforms already.

I have never actually seen a team play with pants that were a different color then their jersey's.It just seems like a contradiction to insure that the headband/sweatbands, undershirts are the correct color but then not have anything in place that says the pants have to match.

Furthermore I'm sure most retailers who are selling uniforms already make them the same color already.

About 2 years ago I was working a post season game with team that had about 3 different colors of pants. This was a lower-income school where it was clear they did not have the money or resources to buy uniforms on a regular basis. Yes a rule in place might make more sense but you will create potential problems outside of the NF jurisdiction and why I kind of think the NF does not need to micro manage every item a player wears.

Peace

Refneck Tue Jan 15, 2008 02:00pm

1. Create an option for choosing to take the ball out of bounds instead of shooting foul shouts in the last 2 minutes.
2. Reduce timeouts to 3 for the whole game.
3. Remove the protection for a ball on the rim (International)
4. Mandate the number of assistant coaches that can sit on or around the bench area.
5. Two 16-minute halves
6. Only active players may request a timeout

LDUB Tue Jan 15, 2008 02:13pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett
I still think we should eliminate possession as part of the penalty for a technical foul. We should always use POI. Think of it this way - if there's a technical against the offensive team, they lose two shots and possession. 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.

Maybe go POI on common fouls too.

I still think we should eliminate possession as part of the penalty for a common foul. We should always use POI. Think of it this way - if there's a common foul against the offensive team, they lose possession. If there's a common foul against the defensive team, they aren't penalized at all because they didn't have possession in the first place. This means the severity of penalty for a common foul 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 common foul if you have the ball than if you don't. That's illogical.

rainmaker Tue Jan 15, 2008 02:26pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by LDUB
Think of it this way - if there's a common foul against the offensive team, they lose possession.

??:confused: :confused: ??

Back In The Saddle Tue Jan 15, 2008 02:30pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by rainmaker
??:confused: :confused: ??

I think he means "committed by" the offensive team.

cmckenna Tue Jan 15, 2008 02:32pm

I would really like to see a change to the free throw line up requirements to be in line with the NCAA. We work several prep schools around here that use NCAA rules and it is just so much easier to officiate when the players are above the blocks and they can come in on the release.

(edited to add) And lining up this way would help with the transition to NCAA for those players that go on to play at that level...

I also agree with the time-out suggestion. Let's go back to having the request come from the floor.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:01pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1