|
|||
Rule change thread - for real, this time
OK - usually the desired NF change that gets the most support here is only allowing players on the court to request and be granted a timeout. Another, although it doesn't seem to get as much support, is having an exception to have team control after the ball becomes live on a throw-in. This would mean inbounding the ball from the front court into the back court (which is now allowed) would be a violation. Also, inbounding the ball in the front court, having it deflected (without establishing player control and therefore team control) into the back court by a teammate then having it recovered by a member of that same team, would also be a violation, which it is not now.
One I have mentioned in the past would be to do away with the automatic possession by a team that just shot technical fouls. I would support going to POI after the two (and I support leaving it at two) shots. My "argument" is based on having this part of a technical foul (shooting team gets possession) penalizes a team that was on offense more than it penalizes a team that was on defense for getting a technical. A team on offense loses two shots and possession while a team on defense loses only two shots, since they didn't have possession in the first place. I don't think there should be a difference in the severity of the penalty based on whether a team had the ball or not. I remember someone - I think it was Camron - had an "argument" against this change. I think it was based on something to do with who usually got rebounds on missed free throws (not during a technical, of course) or something like that, in which he said there really wasn't a harsher penalty against the offensive team. I don't really remember since it was more than two minutes ago. OK guys - let's go.
__________________
Yom HaShoah |
|
|||
Time-outs requested by players only on a live ball would be very popular among officials, but getting the genie back in the bottle would be difficult.
I hope that, finally, players not returning directly to the court immediately after a throw-in would result in a violation. I am fine with the T penalty in HS remaining the same. Unsporting conduct should carry a more severe penalty. And if a team is disadvantaged disproportionately, then they can be PO'd at the offender.
__________________
Never hit a piñata if you see hornets flying out of it. |
|
|||
Quote:
Mark, your play in red should still not be a violation either way, because the throw-in is coming from OOB, not the front court. Remember, it is not considered the front court unless the ball is actually inbounds; it does not matter where the ball is located OOB. I wouldn't have a problem with this either. I think the reasoning behind the NCAA going this route was to make the penalty a little less so officials would be more likely to make the call.
__________________
M&M's - The Official Candy of the Department of Redundancy Department. (Used with permission.) |
|
|||
Please don't tell us you want mechanics for reaching and over-the-back fouls. Gee, maybe we should add one for the "up and down" violation.
__________________
Yom HaShoah |
|
|||
two rules - one mechanic
Rule 1: I would like to see the arrow switch when the ball is placed at the disposal of the thrower. Would make it uniform when there was a foul or violation that the Team throwing "used" the arrow.
Rule 2: I agree that team possession should be established when at the disposal of the thrower. Just like the "flow" this creates and would be easier to administer. (keeping the BC exceptions as described above. Mechanic: Two hand reporting of player numbers. I had the opportunity to work at the table for close to 48 games over two weekends, since our HS hosted the 2A and 3A regional tourneys and a few of the officials must work some women’s games and they would report with two hands. Made it MUCH easier for the table help to know who the foul was on in a loud gym or if the official has "busy" figures. . ( BTW it was a GREAT great perspective for an official, I recommend you try working/sitting at the table for few games and you will have a greater appreciation for the challenges that part of the officiating team has to deal with)
__________________
I read this forum almost every day, but rarely post. I have learned a lot!! Thanks to all who contribute! |
|
|||
I would like to move the 20 minute warm up period to 15. Officals need to be on the court by 10 minutes on the clock and line-ups must be in with 7 minutes to play. Kids don't need the 20 minutes. In a decent amount of games this year we had teams walk to their bench the last 3 minutes and just sit and talk want wait for everything to start.
|
|
|||
My wish would be a very minor mechanics change, instituting a mechanic for a hit to the head we can use while reporting a foul. I know it sounds ridiculous, but I think it would help with communication. The general, all purpose "hit" mechanic is sometimes just that, too general.
|
|
||||
Quote:
No, I'd eliminate from the manual the silly stop clock on out of bounds violations and I'd have no problem with allowing more descriptive foul signals -- like hit to the head, trip, etc. |
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Never hit a piñata if you see hornets flying out of it. |
|
|||
+1
Comes up every year.......and makes sense every yr......
__________________
There was the person who sent ten puns to friends, with the hope that at least one of the puns would make them laugh. No pun in ten did. |
Bookmarks |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Annual NF rule change thread | Mark Padgett | Basketball | 41 | Tue Mar 16, 2010 03:23pm |
Rule change time | Mark Padgett | Basketball | 32 | Tue Dec 16, 2008 01:24pm |
Rule change time again | Mark Padgett | Basketball | 127 | Fri Apr 04, 2008 08:14pm |
Real rule change time! | Mark Padgett | Basketball | 4 | Tue Jul 03, 2007 12:02am |
soapbox time - my favorite rule change | Mark Padgett | Basketball | 6 | Fri Mar 24, 2000 09:37am |