2009-2010 rule changes

[Mark Padgett]

With the season winding down, it's time for our almost annual thread regarding rule changes we'd like to see.

Here's an NF change I'd like to see. It's not a big deal, but it seems more equitable. Team A has team control in their backcourt. They request and are granted a timeout. When they subsequently inbound in the backcourt, why not have the 10 second count pick up from where it left off instead of resetting? What's the logic about them getting extra time to get the ball across just because they got a timeout?

Also (and I think I've suggested this every year since Dr. Naismith and I put up the first peach basket) - no overtimes. Of course, it doesn't affect me, since I don't allow them anyway. I'm just thinking of the rest of you.

[SmokeEater]

Have all levels and all areas of the world play under ONE (1) set of rules.

That way everyone would be competitive not only locally but internationally as well.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Team A has team control in their backcourt. They request and are granted a timeout. When they subsequently inbound in the backcourt, why not have the 10 second count pick up from where it left off instead of resetting? What's the logic about them getting extra time to get the ball across just because they got a timeout?

This is FIBA's rule; with an 8-second limit to get across the DL.

It's a great rule.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

With the season winding down, it's time for our almost annual thread regarding rule changes we'd like to see.

Here's an NF change I'd like to see. It's not a big deal, but it seems more equitable. Team A has team control in their backcourt. They request and are granted a timeout. When they subsequently inbound in the backcourt, why not have the 10 second count pick up from where it left off instead of resetting? What's the logic about them getting extra time to get the ball across just because they got a timeout?

I would hate that rule. Now we have to split hairs with what the count was. That sounds very silly to me. If we use that logic, why not start where you left off on 3 seconds, closely guarded or 5 seconds inbound violations? I do not see the 10 second rule as any different. I really do not want to argue with a coach that thinks 5 seconds went off and I have 3 seconds.

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Also (and I think I've suggested this every year since Dr. Naismith and I put up the first peach basket) - no overtimes. Of course, it doesn't affect me, since I don't allow them anyway. I'm just thinking of the rest of you.

I know this is mostly a joke on your part. But as a general rule, I do not see the big deal with overtimes. I think close games are fun and make you a better official. Why are there so many people opposed to getting overtime games? Now that was a serious question.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SmokeEater

Have all levels and all areas of the world play under ONE (1) set of rules.

That way everyone would be competitive not only locally but internationally as well.

Nope. Not going to happen and would be silly.

Peace

[26 Year Gap]

1. Delayed entry to court after inbounding ball becomes a violation rather than a way to avoid OT. I think this would be called more often if the penalty were not so severe. It could be an exception to other delays in returning to the court.

2. Compression sleeves. The 'medical' loophole is a crock. They are decorative. Either outlaw them, make them legal, or make them legal complying with the other fashion police items.

3. TO by HC during dead ball only. [Genie, get back in the bottle.]

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I would hate that rule. Now we have to split hairs with what the count was. That sounds very silly to me. If we use that logic, why not start where you left off on 3 seconds, closely guarded or 5 seconds inbound violations? I do not see the 10 second rule as any different. I really do not want to argue with a coach that thinks 5 seconds went off and I have 3 seconds.

I know this is mostly a joke on your part. But as a general rule, I do not see the big deal with overtimes. I think close games are fun and make you a better official. Why are there so many people opposed to getting overtime games? Now that was a serious question.

Peace

Back in the day, once you got to the point of transition [8 seconds on a 10 second count, or 4 seconds on a 5 second count], it was too late to have a time-out granted. Since that rule was deleted, it would seem Mark's suggestion is a re-incarnation of it.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I would hate that rule. Now we have to split hairs with what the count was. That sounds very silly to me. If we use that logic, why not start where you left off on 3 seconds, closely guarded or 5 seconds inbound violations? I do not see the 10 second rule as any different. I really do not want to argue with a coach that thinks 5 seconds went off and I have 3 seconds.

With 3 years of FIBA under my belt now, I've found that the exact opposite is true. Coaches are pro-active in asking us how much time is left to get across half.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap

Back in the day, once you got to the point of transition [8 seconds on a 10 second count, or 4 seconds on a 5 second count], it was too late to have a time-out granted. Since that rule was deleted, it would seem Mark's suggestion is a re-incarnation of it.

I am aware that there was once a rule. I just think it was a stupid rule. And it would be inconsistently applied and there would be debates over the time left. Again we need to understand that not everyone at the high school level is that bright to either understand the rule or implement such a rule. This is not the NBA that has a shot clock where this rule is married to the clock.

Peace

[Terrapins Fan]

NO 10 second count for the Free Throw.

Has any one in the entire universe ever called this??????

I actually had one this year and didn't call it because I knew the coach would go nuts.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Terrapins Fan

NO 10 second count for the Free Throw.

Has any one in the entire universe ever called this??????

I actually had one this year and didn't call it because I knew the coach would go nuts.

Could never happen. A player could then rightfully stand there forever with no recourse by the officials.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Terrapins Fan

NO 10 second count for the Free Throw.

Has any one in the entire universe ever called this??????

I actually had one this year and didn't call it because I knew the coach would go nuts.

I saw it happen one time. The kid took an exceptionally long period of time and the coach said nothing. We still give the official crap that called it. He was completely right to call it, but it is so rare we have a little fun with him.

And if a coach cannot teach his kid to shoot a FT within 10 seconds, who cares what he/she thinks.

Peace

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Terrapins Fan

NO 10 second count for the Free Throw.

Has any one in the entire universe ever called this??????

I actually had one this year and didn't call it because I knew the coach would go nuts.

You don't call it because the rule is there.

Without it, some coach would have his player stand there for a couple of minutes so he could rest his players, have a mini-clinic with the other four players, glare at the officials, ...

My proposal: If there's a held ball (or any other reason to use the AP arrow) with 3 seconds or less to go in any quarter except the 4th, the team with the arrow can "decline" the posession and declare the quarter over. This prevents a team from getting a "wasted" AP posession near the end of a quarter, when they can't take advantage of the play.

[JugglingReferee]

A rule that states that if the clock is stopped, and if a timeout is requested (seemingly) at the same time that possession is gained, a set amount of time comes off the clock, such as 0.3s.

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

You don't call it because the rule is there.

Without it, some coach would have his player stand there for a couple of minutes so he could rest his players, have a mini-clinic with the other four players, glare at the officials, ...

My proposal: If there's a held ball (or any other reason to use the AP arrow) with 3 seconds or less to go in any quarter except the 4th, the team with the arrow can "decline" the posession and declare the quarter over. This prevents a team from getting a "wasted" AP posession near the end of a quarter, when they can't take advantage of the play.

Never entered my mind, good one.