If I could change one rule, it would be....

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Larks

I asked you...when is the clock running and the ball is dead?

My point was...and correct me if I am wrong....when the ball checks through the net on a field goal, it becomes dead and then instantly alive for the purposes of the correctable error rules.

Maybe my caffeine hasn't kicked in yet but I don't know any other time that the ball is dead while the clock is moving.

Anyone??

The ball doesn't come "instantly" alive. It becomes alive only when it's at the other team's disposal.

I think someone's point (but I could be wrong) is that they would (or wouldn't) allow a coach to request a TO even after a made basket.

While all this is a nice "fantasy", it will never happen -- the coaches like the rule as it is and won't give up the ability to request TO.

[Raymond]

illegal to play with one contact lense.

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by CHSLadyEagle

I'd probably change it to where instead of a 2nd OT, go to a shootout, best of 5 like Hockey.

Shaq would HATE that.

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

illegal to play with one contact lense.

Or make it a technical.

[Larks]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

The ball doesn't come "instantly" alive. It becomes alive only when it's at the other team's disposal.

Not to nit pick but, are you saying that a foul committed in the interim between "checking the net" and "at the disposal" is technical? (dead ball contact)

I agree, I think he meant to suggest no time outs after a made basket. I agree with you, that will never happen.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Larks

My point was...and correct me if I am wrong....when the ball checks through the net on a field goal, it becomes dead and then instantly alive for the purposes of the correctable error rules.

I'm not sure I agree with this statement. For all rule purposes, the ball does not become live instantly. It becomes live once it's "at the disposal" even for CE purposes. Am I missing something?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Larks

Not to nit pick but, are you saying that a foul committed in the interim between "checking the net" and "at the disposal" is technical? (dead ball contact)

If it's a foul (that is, if it's intentional or flagrant), yes, it's a T.

If it's not intentional or flagrant (nor committed on or by an airborne shooter), then the contact is ignored (meaning no foul; the official might want to note / address it).

[Larks]

I stand corrected....

6-7-1 - dead when a goal is made
6-1-2b - live at the disposal

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Soccer has legal bodychecking?

In a sense, yes. They're called "legal fair charges."

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

And if we (me included) would call the intentional when it's warranted, it would also reduce it.

I don't know about the reduction, but at least it would teach the kids that, if you're going to foul, at least make an effort to steal!

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

The ball doesn't come "instantly" alive. It becomes alive only when it's at the other team's disposal.

I think someone's point (but I could be wrong) is that they would (or wouldn't) allow a coach to request a TO even after a made basket.

While all this is a nice "fantasy", it will never happen -- the coaches like the rule as it is and won't give up the ability to request TO.

Originally Posted by Larks

I asked you...when is the clock running and the ball is dead?

My point was...and correct me if I am wrong....when the ball checks through the net on a field goal, it becomes dead and then instantly alive for the purposes of the correctable error rules.

For the record, the ball is always either dead or live....but never ALIVE.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Larks

Not to nit pick but, are you saying that a foul committed in the interim between "checking the net" and "at the disposal" is technical? (dead ball contact)
...

I called a Technical on kid during this timeframe this season. A1 makes a shot and then turns and shoots an elbow to B1's chest.

[Cobra]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I disagree. I like the rule as it is. In a game where the trailing team tries to foul to catch up, how many fouls do you typically see for this purpose? Two, three, four at most? Note, I'm not asking for the worst case scenario, just the typical situation. I don't think it's broken.

The problem is that there are 3 point field goals now but the number of free throws has not been adjusted. Back in the day you could make as many points on free throws after a foul as the other team could get with a field goal.

There should be a third free throw call the "extra bonus" or something. It is only awarded after 12 or 13 fouls and only if the first 2 free throws are successful. I guess that would be that a player fouled while shooting would also have to be awarded the extra bonus if he made the first two also.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Cobra

The problem is that there are 3 point field goals now but the number of free throws has not been adjusted. Back in the day you could make as many points on free throws after a foul as the other team could get with a field goal.

There should be a third free throw call the "extra bonus" or something. It is only awarded after 12 or 13 fouls and only if the first 2 free throws are successful. I guess that would be that a player fouled while shooting would also have to be awarded the extra bonus if he made the first two also.

This makes sense to me. I'm not sure the adjustment would need to be made to the shooting foul, though.

[ref3808]

Go to a jump ball.

If I'm a defensive player and I've legally created a jump ball situation why do I get penalized for making a smart play based on an arrow?

If I'm an offensive player and I've not protected the ball sufficently than I deserve whatever result comes from the jump.

I think that player has earned the right to contest for the ball as part of competing.

I know some of us are concerned about throwing a good jump ball in a close contest, but I think that skill would improve as more jumps are administered.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by ref3808

Go to a jump ball.

If I'm a defensive player and I've legally created a jump ball situation why do I get penalized for making a smart play based on an arrow?

If I'm an offensive player and I've not protected the ball sufficently than I deserve whatever result comes from the jump.

I think that player has earned the right to contest for the ball as part of competing.

I know some of us are concerned about throwing a good jump ball in a close contest, but I think that skill would improve as more jumps are administered.

If the defensive player had done a good enough job, they would have taken the ball from the offense. They didn't, so they don't deserve anything.

And, by the same reasoning, the offense didn't do a perfect job either.