Rule change time again

[Indianaref]

Rule 4-17 Extra Period is changed to sudden death.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Indianaref

Rule 4-17 Extra Period is changed to sudden death.

Might want to change the name, though. I've been in some small rural towns where they might take this a bit too literally.

"Do we gotta killem' all, or will one of 'em do?"

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by truerookie

1. Adopt all collegiate rules and be done with rule changes that progress toward college basketball.

2. Have seperate rules for boys and girls basketball.

3. Do away with yearly rule changes for a five year period. Identify POE's only on a yearly basis.

Why would you want different rules for girls?

[socalreff]

Originally Posted by fullor30

Why would you want different rules for girls?

We already have different rules in CA.
The rationale is that it prepares them better for the college game as well as speeding up play.
I still think they have the shot clocks wrong though....it should be 30 for boys and 35 for girls.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by socalreff

We already have different rules in CA.
The rationale is that it prepares them better for the college game as well as speeding up play.
I still think they have the shot clocks wrong though....it should be 30 for boys and 35 for girls.

They do that in Cali just so the players competency will stay on par with the referees.

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by socalreff

We already have different rules in CA.
The rationale is that it prepares them better for the college game as well as speeding up play.
I still think they have the shot clocks wrong though....it should be 30 for boys and 35 for girls.

What rules differ?

IMHO, the rationale is dumb as 95 % of high school players aren't playing at the next level. So NCAAW should adapt WNBA rules to prepare them for the pros?

Why not enjoy the moment and not be worried about ...........the next level.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by socalreff

We already have different rules in CA.
The rationale is that it prepares them better for the college game as well as speeding up play.

That's actually a good argument to have one set of rules in college.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by fullor30

Why would you want different rules for girls?

The fact that coaches, players, fans, and even many officials can't properly learn one set of rules should be warning enough against implementing two sets!

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

The fact that coaches, players, fans, and even many officials can't properly learn one set of rules should be warning enough against implementing two sets!

That's one of many good reasons not to

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by Stat-Man

1) Would you want this for lower levels also? Our CYO JV level (4th through 6th graders) presently has a rule that everyone must play in two quarters and no more than three in a regulation game so teams cant keep their best players in the entire game. I'm not sure how we would make this work with halves, unless we added yet more vague and confusing local rules.

I like the idea of halves and not quarters. Our Youth Rec League has 20 min running halves with participation rules - players must play at least one-half of each game, players must sit 5 consecutive minutes. The coaches are very cognizant of it and do a really good job adhering to it. Works very well. Could it be abused? Sure. Game could also be forfeited. Never seen it though. But this is Youth Rec Ball. Who cares? Well, other than the kids, parents, coaches, and fans of course.....

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Stat-Man

1) Would you want this for lower levels also? Our CYO JV level (4th through 6th graders) presently has a rule that everyone must play in two quarters and no more than three in a regulation game so teams cant keep their best players in the entire game. I'm not sure how we would make this work with halves,

This is very similar to why Massachusetts went from halves back to quarters. In HS, a kid could play only 2 halves per day. So you could play the first half of the JV game and then the first half of the Varsity game. But if the coach used the kid for 2 minutes at the beginning of the game, that counted as his whole half. So now, with quarters, that kid could play 2 minutes early in the JV game, and still be eligible to play 3 quarters of the Varsity game.

It just gives the coaches more flexibility in giving out playing time.

[ChuckElias]

Here are the proposals that will be considered by the rules committee:

1. Instant replay by state adoption.
2. Add definition of a "dark" jersey.
3. Adjustments to rules for hair control devices.
4. Adopting the NCAAW closely guarded rules.
5. Change team control rules to include the throw-in.
6. Add common fouls during a throw-in to the definition of team control foul.
7. Change definition of team control so that team control ends on a defensive deflection.
8. Add a new definition for "offensive fouls".
9. Eliminate the jump ball to begin overtime.
10. Eliminate the resumption of play procedure and add another delay of game warning.
11. Play halves instead of quarters.
12. Eliminate coaches' ability to request time-out during live ball.
13. Allow coaches to request a "Safety Time-Out" when player safety becomes a concern.
14. Adopt NCAA rules for FT alignment.
15. Ignore swinging of elbows violation by defense if committed during a successful try.
16. Shot clock by state adoption.
17. Adjust penalty for excessive TO; penalize only if discovered when violated.
18. Adjust penalty for illegal jerseys; one team technical maximum.
19. Technical foul for causing the ring to vibrate, regardless of whether the contact on the backboard is intentional or not.
20. Shoot the bonus on the second team foul in the last two minutes of the second half, regardless of total team fouls.

They'll also consider some signal additions.

[Adam]

1. Don't care.
2. Don't care.
3. Don't care.
4. I'm against it.
5. I like it.
6. Same as #5.
7. Something tells me the idiot who sumitted this request didn't think it through; or isn't capable of thinking it through. Must be from New Jersey.
8. Don't care.
9. Against it.
10. Against it.
11. Against it.
12. Love it.
13. This is just stupid.
14. Like it.
15. Like it.
16. Don't care.
17. Against it.
18. Like it.
19. Like it; if it affects the shot.
20. Not quite as stupid as 7 or 13, but it's running a solid third place.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

20. Not quite as stupid as 7 or 13, but it's running a solid third place.

I'm not offended by #20. It's a situation that rarely happens and when it does it would be nice to not have to call four fouls in a row to get to the bonus.

I don't mind playing halves, but someone tell me why 18 minutes and not 16? To me, it's adding a mandated overtime period to every game and I guarantee that the schools will cut the same checks I signed my contracts for and they will not add an additional 12.5% to the game fee. Not that money is a huge factor to me, but the schools never "do the right thing" in this area.

I would change the timeouts to 2 60-second timeouts and 3 30-second timeouts, but nobody has ever asked me.

[ChuckElias]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

I don't mind playing halves, but someone tell me why 18 minutes and not 16?

Rich, changing the playing time is not part of this proposal. The 18 minute halves are unique to Minnesota, as far as I know. (I agree with you about the extra playing time, I'm against it.)