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

[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.

[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.

[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.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

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.

In this country, more games are played under NFHS and NCAA rules than any other. And quite frankly, I don't care what they play in other countries.

I don't see this changing anytime soon. The NFHS is loathe to make drastic changes to the rules and this change would be drastic.

[APG]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

In this country, more games are played under NFHS and NCAA rules than any other. And quite frankly, I don't care what they play in other countries.

I don't see this changing anytime soon. The NFHS is loathe to make drastic changes to the rules and this change would be drastic.

I know that...I just pointed that two major rules body have seen no problem with the rule.

As far as it being drastic, it'd be a very easy rule to implement in my opinion. A more drastic rule would be adding a restricted area for secondary defenders. We've seen the NBA, FIBA, and NCAA-M go to it. I don't know if NFHS will add it anytime soon. I'd much rather see a shot clock mandated.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

I know that...I just pointed that two major rules body have seen no problem with the rule.

As far as it being drastic, it'd be a very easy rule to implement in my opinion. A more drastic rule would be adding a restricted area for secondary defenders. We've seen the NBA, FIBA, and NCAA-M go to it. I don't know if NFHS will add it anytime soon. I'd much rather see a shot clock mandated.

We'll see none of those.

I'd prefer a shot clock. We had a team pull it out with 2 minutes left in the first and second quarter Thursday night. So we stood around for probably 3:30 of the game watching the clock run down.

[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.

[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.

[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?