Way back in ancient times if a player from the team who had control of the ball committed the foul it was a team control foul and a player control foul was also a team control foul. As long is there is team control, no free throws would be shot. It is my educated guess that somebody has gotten out an old rule book and that is the wording the will be used.

Just so I'm clear on what you're saying, Mark, let me go back to the play I mentioned earlier and see what you think:

A1 is dribbling the ball (team control and player control). B1 bats the ball away from A1 (team control, but no player control). A2 fouls B2 while trying to recover the loose ball.

In that situation, according to what I think you're saying, B2 would NOT shoot any FTs, just awarded possession b/c Team A still was in control. Is that correct? If it is, then I don't like it. I can live with it, but I don't like it.

Chuck

new NCAA rule
 

What do we do with fouls on OOB throw in situations. Ai inbounds but A2 illegally picks B2. Or B1 holds A2. The inbounder A1 does not have player or team control.

Chuck, you are correct.

As far as living with it or living without it. When I started officiating the new NCAA rule was the law of the land for both NBCOUSAC (NFHS/NCAA Men's) and NAGWS (which modeled its rules code after FIBA) and then NBCOUSAC changed to what has been in the NFHS/NCAA (both men's and women's) for years now. I really did not care one way or another about either way the rule is or was written.

Re: new NCAA rule
 

For this situation, nothing has changed. Just handle the play as you have in the past because there is no team control during a throw-in.

My guess is that the actual rule change (i.e., what's in the book, not in the press release) and the "changes/updates" section will cover most of these situations.

Re: Re: new NCAA rule
 

So we would shoot the bonus. But it seems clear in this case that the "offensive" player committed the foul. See the problem? I agree with you, Mark. This would be handled the same as always. But I can see finnref's confusion.

Chuck

This rule change is nothing for the young guys to get worried about. Just remember your definitions for player and team control and when those situations cease to exist. We old geezers were able to do it over twenty years ago, and there really is nothing to worry about.

I'm not worried. But I'm just unclear as to exactly how the rule will be interpreted. My hope is that we'll still shoot the bonus if there's a foul during a scramble for a loose ball; b/c that's not what we typically think of as an "offensive foul". Player control fouls and illegal screens, no shots; I love it. But if nobody has control of the ball, I think we should still shoot it. Just my opinion.

Chuck

Chuck, please, do not use the term "offensive foul" when refering to NFHS/NCAA rules. There is no such animal in NFHS/NCAA rules. When a Player A1 commits a personal foul, there can only be ball conditions: 1) Team A has control of the ball; 2) Team B has control of the ball; or 3) neither Team A or Team B has control of the ball.

As I have said in a previous thread - this is definitely one area that is handled much more clearly and easier (IMHO)in FIBA rules. To clarify:

Any common foul committed by a player whose team is in possession does not result in free throws, regardless of the number of team fouls committed.

I'm not sure I understand why people are trying to over complicate an issue which I think is a pretty straight forward rule.

As an aside - many people I know have commented on how FIBA rules are getting closer to NBA/NFHS/NCAA (aka US rules). It is interesting to see the opposite also occurring (although I am sure that Mark D will point out that the US is simply regressing to an old rule!). Personally I feel that in 5 to 10 years the rules will basically be the same - probably the main difference will be the shape of the key - and in this case I prefer the FIBA model :)

Just because a rule may be "clear and easier" doesn't make it equitable. Since a foul committed by an offensive player is caused by that player initiating illegal contact, it should be penalized just the same as when a defensive player initiates illegal contact. If the defense shoots free throws when in the bonus, so should the offense.

As for the shape of the key, I really cannot stand that crapazoid. :confused:

I much rather prefer the rectaltangle. :p

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Quote:

Chuck, please, do not use the term "offensive foul" when refering to NFHS/NCAA rules. There is no such animal in NFHS/NCAA rules.

I know that Mark. That's why I used the quotation marks: "offensive foul", to indicate that it is so-called. My point remains the same. We typically think of fouls committed by the offense (is that better?) as illegal screens and PC fouls. Since a scramble for a loose ball doesn't fit into either of those categories, I would hope that it would also not be covered by the new rule.

Does that smooth those ruffled semantic feathers? ;)

Chuck

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mark Padgett

Quote:

I much rather prefer the rectaltangle. :p

After reading TH's post about playing a different game "Down Under", I sure hope the 'rectaltangle' never makes its way into Australian Rules Basketball!!!!!

Chuck

Oz, I'm not at all familiar with FIBA rules, but your description doesn't really seem any clearer than what we've been discussing. How does FIBA define a team as being "in possession"? Does that mean team control, or does it mean a player on the offensive team has possession by holding or dribbling the ball? That can make a difference on a loose ball scramble. What would you do under the FIBA rules in the play I described in an earlier post?

Chuck