![]() |
Technical Foul Procedure
I know some rules are different in college vs highschool. Why is the technical foul procedure different. Watching Ohio St. vs Northwestern. Foul called on Northwestern on the ground. Then a technical foul. They shoot the technical free throws then the 1 and 1 freethrows. In high school they shoot bonus, then technical, then team receives ball based on order of occcurence. I know they do things differently, but why?
|
Quote:
The college rules makers decided that wasn't "fair" so, in general, it's "shoot the T and resume at POI." |
Quote:
Peace |
The NBE has a procedure that really defines the "role" of a technical foul in a game. When one is called, the game stops, they take care of the technical, then pick the game up where it was at the time. The theory is that a technical foul is a penalty for something that takes place "outside" the purview of the game so it is treated that way. Whether the penalty should be one shot or two is another subject.
I read a long time ago that this was the thinking behind how their rule came into being. I'm guessing it's been that way pretty much ever since the league started. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
I haven't seen any POE's from the Fed. regarding needing to call more T's, or do a better job of penalizing behavior. I would assume if I had, it would be more likely they would consider lessening the penalty for the same reason the NCAA did. Jmo. |
Quote:
I think the reason for the change was more along the lines of what Mark suggest....even consequences whether you have the ball or not. There was no need for most T-worthy offenses to be considered worse if you had the ball. |
If I remember correctly (and at my age, that happens rarely) the Fed rule of two shots plus possession was discussed here a few years ago on a thread about proposed rule changes. I suggested taking away the possession part since it "penalized" the offense more than the defense (as discussed above in this thread). However, someone - I think it might have been Camron - brought up the issue of comparing a technical to a standard shooting foul in which the teams lined up on the lane. In that case, the non-shooting team always has an advantage because they have the two players who are in the most advantageous rebounding position. I'm not saying the argument was that technicals should be shot with players along the lane, but that there was some kind of "balance" explained in the thread that made the possession component of the penalty seem to actually be fairer than not including it because of that "rebounding" theory.
I don't think I really explained it properly here (I said it was from a few years ago) but maybe someone else might remember it and explain it more clearly. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Logical imo. |
Quote:
I remember asking, off the cuff, if I should raise my arm for a delayed penalty like in hockey. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:07pm. |