Proposed rec league rule change

[Mark Padgett]

Just got home from a Board mtg for our local kids rec league. We discussed the fact that there's no NF rule changes for next season and then one of the members, who is also a ref, suggested we put in our own change for next year. He proposed that a team who is fouled (non-shooting) and is in the bonus can have the option of shooting the free throws or just inbounding the ball if the foul occurs in the last two minutes of the game.

I know this has been discussed on this board. I wonder about trying this out in a rec league to see how it works. We'll make this decision at our July meeting. The league starts registration in Sept., practices start in Oct. and games begin in Dec.

I would appreciate your thoughts about trying this in a kids (grades 3 thru HS) rec league. We have other variances from NF rules such as length of quarters and a no press mercy rule, but that's about it.

Thanks in advance for your input.

[Nevadaref]

That option doesn't make any sense to me.
All that will happen is that the defense will foul again, and possibly much harder.

The defense gets a risk free opportunity to steal the ball because if they foul they face no penalty. They are simply in the same situation that they were before. The team can take the attitude that they can be very aggressive in taking the ball away from their opponents and put the onus on the official to call a foul. If the offical does that's no problem because they will just do it again, and if the official doesn't, then that's great because they just got the ball.

Totally silly.

[stratref]

I envision the result to be something like if a team were to take this option their opponents would continue to foul them harder and harder until either the original offensive team commits a turnover on a throw-in or steal attempt/foul or the officials will have to call an intentional foul for excessive contact on these steal attempt/foul attempt.
At face value I like the rule as it could make the ends of games quicker, but the side effects I mention above make is less desirable to me.
The part I don't like is that a team that cannot shoot free-throws is no longer penalized for having such a flaw in their team.
If my memory is correct it was tried in the "pre-season" in NCAA-M almost 10 years ago. I think it was dropped because almost any lead with 30 seconds was virtually a lock, and 6 points with 2 min was almost the same, it makes it hard for a team to attempt a comeback at the ends of games. In FED w/o shot clocks a well disciplined team could lock up games quicker then in the NCAA.

Jasper

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

That option doesn't make any sense to me.
All that will happen is that the defense will foul again, and possibly much harder.

I agree. You would have to add some penalty (run some time off the clock) if a second foul was committed within a certain time of the first foul, and there had been no loss of posession.

One twist to this you could throw in, and it'll definitely stir up the board, is if a team is in the 1 and 1 bonus, they can have this option, but they don't when they get to the 2 shot bonus. Imagine the defense being stupid enough to hack them into getting 2 easy shots?

In a mens comp league that I work, any foul in the last 2 minutes of either half results in 2 FTs no matter what the foul count is...

Kind of wierd but it puts the emphasis on good solid defense.

[Adam]

1. I'm not a fan of the change.
2. If it's made, I see no reason that it benefits the defense. If the offense wants to shoot free throws, they can.
3. Making them all 2 shot fouls accomplishes the same thing, IMO.
4. I think it's an attemp to fix a non-problem.

[icallfouls]

Better yet, instruct the officials that more thought needs to be given to the idea that this is an intentional foul - according to the NFHS - which is in the rules and is a POE from time to time.

However, if that cannot be accomplished, just give the offended team 1 point and the ball back, or just give them 2 points.

[Texas Aggie]

I've been suggesting this change for 2 years. I look forward to hearing how it works out.

All that will happen is that the defense will foul again, and possibly much harder.

What makes you think they will foul much harder? Don't we have a somewhat harsh penalty for excessive contact?

All that will happen is the throw in will take place with pressure much like it does now after a team comes out with a lead following a timeout. Do you see harder contact in that situations?

The defense gets a risk free opportunity to steal the ball

The coach will balance this risk against the one in shooting free throws. Remember, its a CHOICE. How can that be bad?

A stiffer press often leaves open the possibility of an open player running down the court. I'm sure coaches know about this and will plan accordingly. Again, the throw in will be no different than throw ins we currently have.

Totally silly.

Huh? I can see on objection to the idea but it isn't any more silly than the option to decline penalties in football.

What's silly is the rules committee saying in their own publication that committing a rules infraction is an "acceptable coaching strategy" and talking about "proper" ways to commit a rules infraction. Whether you agree that fouling to stop the clock is or should be an acceptable coaching strategy, you have to concede that the rules committee saying advocating infractions is a bit bizarre.

[eg-italy]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Just got home from a Board mtg for our local kids rec league. We discussed the fact that there's no NF rule changes for next season and then one of the members, who is also a ref, suggested we put in our own change for next year. He proposed that a team who is fouled (non-shooting) and is in the bonus can have the option of shooting the free throws or just inbounding the ball if the foul occurs in the last two minutes of the game.

I know this has been discussed on this board. I wonder about trying this out in a rec league to see how it works. We'll make this decision at our July meeting. The league starts registration in Sept., practices start in Oct. and games begin in Dec.

I would appreciate your thoughts about trying this in a kids (grades 3 thru HS) rec league. We have other variances from NF rules such as length of quarters and a no press mercy rule, but that's about it.

Thanks in advance for your input.

Just for information: FIBA used to have a similar rule. Maybe this would change your mind.

I'm glad they cancelled it several years ago: coaches should teach their player, in particular the young ones, how to score free throws.

If you insist on trying that, you should make it clear at least: (1) who is in charge of the choice (captain? coach?); (2) when the choice must be made (before, during or after a TO following the foul?).

Ciao

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

4. I think it's an attempt to fix a non-problem.

Or, as I call it, a solution in search of a problem.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Or, as I call it, a solution in search of a problem.

Your way is better, you don't have to use a non-word.

[rockyroad]

Mark, I'm not sure I understand the point of the rule change.

If it is trying to make it more of a penalty against the team that is fouling down the stretch, I think you are missing the mark (no pun intended). It really is a lesser penalty to just take the ball oob, plus that allows the defensive team to now get into their press when perhaps they weren't able to before.

If it is trying to protect a team with lousy free throw shooters, then it's an even worse decision. They need to learn to shoot better.

Maybe you could go to an automatic one point and the ball back or something like that, but this doesn't really "fix" anything, imo.

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

I would appreciate your thoughts about trying this in a kids (grades 3 thru HS) rec league. We have other variances from NF rules such as length of quarters and a no press mercy rule, but that's about it.

I didn't see the highlighted part till now. Earlier when I read the postings, I didn't take into consideration the ages. Now that I've re-read this and see the ages, I'm curious what age group this proposed rule is being considered for. If it's being considered for the older kids (JH and HS), then I think it's a terrible idea. For the younger kids, some variation of this rule might be handy, but not in the format suggested. There has to be a better idea out there, such as the automatic 1 point and ball OOB that someone else suggested.