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

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by so cal lurker

Yuck. I know I'm old fashioned, I like the jump balls and hate the AP. (Maybe I like them cuz I was good at them. . . or knew what I could get away with . . .) I reluctantly accept that it's here to stay (and agree it's a good thing for lower levels, esp lower level girls where I recall almost having to ice my arm after doing 5th grade girl's games when I was in high school) -- but unbalance OT? Yuck. Double yuck. A jump at the start remains a nice ceremonial beginning to the game. And OT deserves the ceremony, too.

One of the things I hated most about GV back in the 70s was picking out which 2 out of 8 girls were in there first when they tied up the ball immediately after a jump ball. For the third time in rapid succession. Rapid might not be the right term, because everything was in slow motion. The AP arrow was the best rule change in the last 25 years, despite what Dickie V thinks about it.

[chseagle]

Sorry but was 4 at the time.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Officiate? I'm sure that many Forum members weren't even born before 1985.

Concerning OTs looks like there's an agreement to disagree concerning jump balls & AP.

[Forksref]

Originally Posted by chseagle

I like the idea of 16 minute halves instead or 8 minute quarters. That would take away 2 1-minute official TOs & could make the game go a bit faster.

We've gone to 18 min halves in ND and MN for V games. It takes away a quarter break but gives 2 more minutes for possible bonus FT's. So it seems like a wash. We have shot clock in V games (and some JV games). So far in 3 V games I've had 1 SC violation.

[constable]

I personally like the 4 quarter system. It gives you the chance to possibly prevent some book keeping errors from coming back to bite you later in the game. It is also nice to get a breather for 60 seconds.

In the grand scheme of things, is an extra minute between the 1st and 2nd and 3rd and 4th really that big of a deal?

Speaking of speaking up the game, I do enjoy FIBA's rule for the penalty. Fouls reset after each quarter, 2 shot penalty on the 5th foul- makes for a smoother game than FED.

Also, in FIBA if you are entitled to a back court throw in in the last 2 mins of the 4th or OT and you call a time out, than you get the ball at the throw in line in your front court.

[APG]

Originally Posted by constable

I personally like the 4 quarter system. It gives you the chance to possibly prevent some book keeping errors from coming back to bite you later in the game. It is also nice to get a breather for 60 seconds.

In the grand scheme of things, is an extra minute between the 1st and 2nd and 3rd and 4th really that big of a deal?

Speaking of speaking up the game, I do enjoy FIBA's rule for the penalty. Fouls reset after each quarter, 2 shot penalty on the 5th foul- makes for a smoother game than FED.

Also, in FIBA if you are entitled to a back court throw in in the last 2 mins of the 4th or OT and you call a time out, than you get the ball at the throw in line in your front court.

You'll never get the people in this forum to agree to those rules changes...why you ask? Cause it'd be too much like the NBA.

I do think we'll see the timeout rule happen at some point. I also wouldn't mind experimenting with resetting the penalty count each quarter.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

You'll never get the people in this forum to agree to those rules changes...why you ask? Cause it'd be too much like the NBA.

I do think we'll see the timeout rule happen at some point. I also wouldn't mind experimenting with resetting the penalty count each quarter.

Why should a team be allowed to move the ball up on a timeout? I know the NBE does it, but even there it really makes no sense at all.

[Stat-Man]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

BUT, seriously, I would like to see the Closely Guarded rule changed to three feet instead of six feet and only while holding the ball. This is the rule in FIBA and NCAA Women's.

MTD, Sr.

Without a shot clock in place, this wouldn't be a good idea.

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

You'll never get the people in this forum to agree to those rules changes...why you ask? Cause it'd be too much like the NBA.

I do think we'll see the timeout rule happen at some point. I also wouldn't mind experimenting with resetting the penalty count each quarter.

Actually, back in the 60s, I believe the bonus reset every quarter and it was on the 5th foul. However, the first four fouls were 1 shot unless a shooting foul or an offensive foul. Not sure when the possession took place, but probably there was strategic fouling going on. Especially in the 4th qtr of close games. I remember this from watching HS games when I was in grade school, so other guys who may have been calling games back then could probably expand on it.

[Stat-Man]

Originally Posted by Scratch85

I would like to get rid of the jump ball to start the game. Give the first (start of game) possession to the V. Then alternate at each quarter regardless of AP arrow. Reset AP with possession at each quarter.

Kind of like "first bats" and "last bats" in baseball. Given the AP it will still awlays be within one of being even. And, Home team will have possession to start the 4th quarter.

Something similar happens under NBA rules. The team that loses the jump gets the ball to start quarters 2 & 3 and the jump winner gets the ball for the 4th quarter.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

You'll never get the people in this forum to agree to those rules changes...why you ask? Cause it'd be too much like the NBA.

I do think we'll see the timeout rule happen at some point. I also wouldn't mind experimenting with resetting the penalty count each quarter.

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Why should a team be allowed to move the ball up on a timeout? I know the NBE does it, but even there it really makes no sense at all.

The NBA makes no bones about this rule. They have it to benefit the offense.

[tjones1]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Not gonna happen.

With entering on the release, there's too much unnecessary contact and jockeying for position on MADE free throws. They've gone to great lengths over the past 10 years to cut down on such play. Changing the rule would be a complete change in philosophy.

I agree. But, then again, they stated time and time again that they had no plans to move the players up one space on the free throw lane.

Originally Posted by CDurham

Coaches calling timeouts while play is live on the court.

Already in place....

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

Not grant a HC's time out request unless the ball is dead and the clock is stopped. I'd settle for unless the ball is dead, but would prefer both dead ball and stopped clock.

Ahhh, maybe that's what you meant.

Originally Posted by BBrules

Simplify the backcourt violation rules

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Get rid of that stupid BC interp. I'd be satisfied with that.

As someone has already asked... how?! I think they are pretty straight forward.... and I agree Snaq, get rid of that silly interp.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap

Actually, back in the 60s, I believe the bonus reset every quarter and it was on the 5th foul. However, the first four fouls were 1 shot unless a shooting foul or an offensive foul.

As a player back in the olden days, I kind of remember something like that. I was too busy playing to have any real understanding of the rules. When the official tossed me the ball and said, "One shot", I just took the ball, and shot it (it usually missed). Now that you bring it up, I do remember lots of one shot free throws, definitely a lot more than in today's game.

I hope that someone who really remembers the rule (Mark T. DeNucci, Sr., Jurassic Referee, others) can follow up on this.

[APG]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Why should a team be allowed to move the ball up on a timeout? I know the NBE does it, but even there it really makes no sense at all.

The NBA and FIBA have the rule, so if you really think about it, high school and college are in the minority. I think if NFHS surveyed coaches and ADs on a possible rule change to reflect the NBA and FIBA rule, they'd get a good majority approval on the change.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

You'll never get the people in this forum to agree to those rules changes...why you ask? Cause it'd be too much like the NBA.

I haven't seen a whole lot of complaining about the NBA rules (at least those listed in this thread). It's more about the game itself and perhaps the travelling rule.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I haven't seen a whole lot of complaining about the NBA rules (at least those listed in this thread). It's more about the game itself and perhaps the travelling rule.

You mean the one that allows Paul Pierce to legally take 4 steps without dribbling?