NCAA rule changes: Rules Committee Recommendations

[truerookie]

Originally Posted by Ch1town

True, but to make it cut & dry like the NCAA is proposing removes the judgement aspect & makes us follow the rule. I think that will eliminate discussion between coaches & players to officials about "what we saw".

By FED rules "Coach I had a real good look & the ball was in it's downward flight after it hit the glass".
Judgement call, which can still be disputed after your explanation.

Proposed NCAA rule "Coach the block came after it hit the glass... bucket".
Rule, leaves no room for discussion.

Nope, this rule is not going to change the approach by coaches and players when it comes to questioning officials judgment.

Sit: A defensive player blocks the ball on it upward flight and it has not hit the backboard. But, the block carries it to the backboard and its above the rim?

So what do you say to those individuals when that happens?

Answer: " Coach I had a real good look & the ball was on its upward flight; the block (happened) causing it to hit the backboard although it was above the rim".

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by truerookie

Nope, this rule is not going to change the approach by coaches and players when it comes to questioning officials judgment.

Sit: A defensive player blocks the ball on it upward flight and it has not hit the backboard. But, the block carries it to the backboard and its above the rim?

So what do you say to those individuals when that happens?

Answer: " Coach I had a real good look & the ball was on its upward flight; the block (happened) causing it to hit the backboard although it was above the rim".

Agree, the new rule will change nothing about how these calls are argued by the players & coaches.

Cool, I understand that too. Just saying I like starting my response with "Coach by rule" instead of "Coach I got a good look".
Rule vs Judgement...

Under the new proposal if it hits the glass, then the response is simple IMO, by rule... GT

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Ch1town

Cool, I understand that too. Just saying I like starting my response with "Coach by rule" instead of "Coach I got a good look".
Rule vs Judgement...

Under the new proposal if it hits the glass, then the response is simple IMO, by rule... GT

"Coach, by rule if the ball is still on the way up, it's legal, even if the ball has hit the backboard."

The rule changes the judgment point, but doesn't affect how to deal with the coach.

The problems are that it's probably easier to tell which happened on the replay, and the coach has an "objective" thing to look for, so I'd expect more arguments, nad more "missed calls" from the talking heads.