Rule change time again

[Back In The Saddle]

Just out of curiosity, how would you define "dark" for purposes of jersey color? As "easily distinguishable from white"? Some predefined set of colors? Something more scientific?

I know there's a lot of angst among the volleyball crowd about libero jerseys and how they are supposed to be easily distinguishable from regular players. But they can't seem to agree what that means. But that's about the only definition I can see making sense in this case.

[Back In The Saddle]

Okay, I'm really struggling to see why anybody would seriously suggest changing the closely guarded rule in this way. Here's the submitted rationale: "The current rule gives a decided advantage to the defender and takes away a vital skill in ball handling, controlling the dribble. The rule should be changed to eliminate the element of dribbling, or the distance should be reduced. Under the current rule, a player with the ball at the top of the 3-point arc can be closely guarded by a defender standing on the free throw line."

First of all, as I understand it, all of these types of rules that have been tried over the years have, at their root, the express intention of neutralizing the Hot Rod Hundleys of the world. We don't want a super-skilled dribbler to be able to control the ball for minutes at a time. But this proposal seems to want to go there.

Second of all, three feet? Are you kidding me? Any reasonably quick point guard will blow right by any defeneder who is within three feet. So if we reduce the distance, we screw the defense. Sure, this rule works in NCAAW, but they also have a relatively short shot clock to force the action.

Am I missing something? Or is this just a non-starter? And, if so, how did this ever get past the survey and onto the proposed list?

[Mark Padgett]

I think they should bring back the peach baskets.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

I think they should bring back the peach baskets.

And shirts and skins too!

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I had heard there was concern over players getting hurt during jump balls, so that's why they went to the coin toss for a few years

If they really thought that, why would they allow rebounding? Whatinthehell is the difference? Hell, using the same rationale, we should flip a coin on every missed shot.

Silly monkeys....

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I'd never heard the reasoning that officials were inconsistent. I had heard there was concern over players getting hurt during jump balls, so that's why they went to the coin toss for a few years (I'm pretty sure it was more than 2 seasons.) My guess is the guy who proposed the safety timeout is related to the one who got the coin toss getting implemented.

Well if that is the case, I do not think I have ever heard or seen a player get hurt during a jump ball. If anything I have been kicked and hit more than any player I have ever seen.

Peace

[26 Year Gap]

I think the rule changes normally are voted upon and then leaked..er...released late in the month of April.

Rut, does the kicking occur in the captains' meeting? or only during the actual toss?

[Camron Rust]

My comments embedded in red.

Originally Posted by ChuckElias

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

1. Instant replay by state adoption.
No. It works with a small pool of officials and with trained A/V crews. What you'd get at the HS level would be a nightmare....it could take hours to review a single play correctly. And I'm against provisions intended for only the playoffs....they should be played under the same circumstances as the rest of the season.
2. Add definition of a "dark" jersey.
OK.
3. Adjustments to rules for hair control devices.
Such as reducing them? OK. Otherwise, why?
4. Adopting the NCAAW closely guarded rules.
No. Works when you have a short shot clock and/or only a few extremely gifted and quick dribblers.
5. Change team control rules to include the throw-in.
Yes....obvious.
6. Add common fouls during a throw-in to the definition of team control foul.
Yes...obvious.
7. Change definition of team control so that team control ends on a defensive deflection.
This is going to be as big of a mess as the NCAA's experiment into awarding the held ball to the defense. Leave it alone. It may have warts but at least it is clearly defined and the points at which it ends are easily identifiable.
8. Add a new definition for "offensive fouls".
Why? Doesn't team control take care of that if it is changed to cover throw-ins.
9. Eliminate the jump ball to begin overtime.
No. Unnecessary.
10. Eliminate the resumption of play procedure and add another delay of game warning.
No. The warning may be issued but a T will never get called...simply putting it on the floor costs, at most, a possession....sufficient penalty. And is more likely to be enforced than a T.
11. Play halves instead of quarters.
OK, but why? Nothing is wrong with quarters.
12. Eliminate coaches' ability to request time-out during live ball.
ABSOLUTELY!!!
13. Allow coaches to request a "Safety Time-Out" when player safety becomes a concern.
I agree with the others....this is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.
14. Adopt NCAA rules for FT alignment.
OK, but why? It practically guarantees the defense gets the rebound instead of the roughly 80/20 split we have now. Why not just give the ball to the defense after the shots if cleaning up fouls is the goal (remembering that the NCAA enters on the release...presenting differnet issues).
15. Ignore swinging of elbows violation by defense if committed during a successful try.
No.
16. Shot clock by state adoption.
No....unneccessary. With the disparity in what teams have to work with, the non-shot-clock game give the
17. Adjust penalty for excessive TO; penalize only if discovered when violated.
No.
18. Adjust penalty for illegal jerseys; one team technical maximum.
Yes....more appropriate penalty.
19. Technical foul for causing the ring to vibrate, regardless of whether the contact on the backboard is intentional or not.
No.
20. Shoot the bonus on the second team foul in the last two minutes of the second half, regardless of total team fouls.
No.

They'll also consider some signal additions.

[Mark Padgett]

I heard the new signal additions that are being considered are for "over the back" and "reaching"! Of course, this request came at the behest of coaches, who can't understand why there are no signals for these fouls, which occur all game long and are never called by officials.

BTW - I wonder what the signal would be to indicate a "safety timeout"? Maybe this:

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

I heard the new signal additions that are being considered are for "over the back" and "reaching"! Of course, this request came at the behest of coaches, who can't understand why there are no signals for these fouls, which occur all game long and are never called by officials.

BTW - I wonder what the signal would be to indicate a "safety timeout"? Maybe this:

[rainmaker]

1. Instant replay by state adoption.

No. It works with a small pool of officials and with trained A/V crews. What you'd get at the HS level would be a nightmare....it could take hours to review a single play correctly. And I'm against provisions intended for only the playoffs....they should be played under the same circumstances as the rest of the season.

13. Allow coaches to request a "Safety Time-Out" when player safety becomes a concern.

I agree with the others....this is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

I agree completely, Camron. When, in my mind, I put certain refs as partners on certain games, either of these rule changes is almost enough to give me hives. It would be quite simply awful.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

If they really thought that, why would they allow rebounding? Whatinthehell is the difference? Hell, using the same rationale, we should flip a coin on every missed shot.

Silly monkeys....

Why can't we just have a safety timeout on every miss?

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

If they really thought that, why would they allow rebounding? Whatinthehell is the difference? Hell, using the same rationale, we should flip a coin on every missed shot.

Silly monkeys....

Or, just outlaw basketball altogether and play chess instead. After all, when did someone ever have to be carried out of a chess match on a backboard because of whiplash or a concussion?

[Mark Padgett]

When I first saw the term "safety timeout" in the original rules consideration list, I thought it meant that if we were going to eliminate coaches requesting timeouts during a live ball situation, then this would be an exception if a player on the floor appeared hurt. OK, that I could see. But they way it was eventually explained is just plain inane. How about a "let 'em play" timeout. It would work the same, only that it would be called if the coaches thought the game was being called too tight.

What would happen if one coach thought the game was being called too loose and the other thought it was being called too tight? I know - call a timeout and let the two of them arm wrestle at mid-court. Winner gets the game called his way.

See how dumb this proposed change really is. The end result would be that coaches, not officials, will in effect be calling the games. Yeah - that'll work.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

Or, just outlaw basketball altogether and play chess instead. After all, when did someone ever have to be carried out of a chess match on a backboard because of whiplash or a concussion?

Juulie - you've never seen Josh play chess.

Inside joke, folks.