2009-2010 NCAA Rule Changes (Possibly)

[JBleach85]

I was just doing my morning crawl through ESPN's website and this article caught my attnetion regarding possible rule changes for college both Men's and Women's. The one thing that relly caught my attention in this article is the possibility of starting to call the men's game like the pro's because of using the basketball as a mark of where no charges could be called because of an invisable line. What does everyone else think?

http://http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb...ory?id=4147745

J. Bleach

[rockchalk jhawk]

might want to fix that link there champ.

[Reffing Rev.]

NCAA seeks free-throw, defense rule changes - ESPN

Not my OP but I found the story...

I'm not a fan of the invisible arc under the basket, or the visible one for that matter. Taking a charge is a risk/reward defensive tactic, this only takes away the reward for attaining a position before an opponent who may or may not make a try.

As far as substituting a free thrower, I've never liked that, I think allowing one of the other 4 players on the floor to take the free throws is a fair change. Think of a player with a weakness to the Hack-a-Shaq strategy. All he has to do under the current rules is get "injured" everytime he is fouled, sit out until the next oppoortunity to sub and his team benefits.

And if you're going to look at a replay to determine if a foul was flagrant, why not be able to penalize it as intentional or a technical if replay shows it clearly was?

Just my 2 cents on these.

[bbcof83]

All good changes. Glad to see them. Especially the change for video review allowing intentional and technical fouls, not only flagrant.

Originally Posted by Reffing Rev.

NCAA seeks free-throw, defense rule changes - ESPN

Not my OP but I found the story...

I'm not a fan of the invisible arc under the basket, or the visible one for that matter. Taking a charge is a risk/reward defensive tactic, this only takes away the reward for attaining a position before an opponent who may or may not make a try.

As far as substituting a free thrower, I've never liked that, I think allowing one of the other 4 players on the floor to take the free throws is a fair change. Think of a player with a weakness to the Hack-a-Shaq strategy. All he has to do under the current rules is get "injured" everytime he is fouled, sit out until the next oppoortunity to sub and his team benefits.

And if you're going to look at a replay to determine if a foul was flagrant, why not be able to penalize it as intentional or a technical if replay shows it clearly was?

Just my 2 cents on these.

I agree, it should be one of the four players on the floor, however I disagree with the change that allows the OPPOSING coach to pick which one it is. There can be some serious sportsmanship issues there, even though there were some concerns with the old rule.

[Kelvin green]

My personal opinion...

Unless they paint the resticted area it will be inconsistent in enforcement... and just cause more problems for us in the "you cant play defense there comment"

Instead of the nonsense of replacing players if the player cant shoot his own FT then he is out of the game unless it was a flgrant foul...if he still cant or wont shoot then opposing coach can pick any player... if it was flagrant own coach can pick anyone...... Then there wont be as many sportsmanship issues

[Nevadaref]

The under the basket area policy is a complete reversal from the prior year when Hank Nichols was still the head cheese. It seems that John Adams doesn't care for defenders standing under there.

So we go back and forth again.