2013 NCAA-M recommendations

[Raymond]

On Arbiter today

Men’s Officiating Guidance

The men’s committee reviewed blocking and charging plays and the impact of the three-foot restricted area arc. The committee believes that in some cases the call is not being made correctly, sometimes giving the defense an advantage.

To help address this, the committee approved guidelines to help better administer these rules:
• Before the offensive player (with the ball) becomes airborne, the defender must have two feet on the floor, be facing the opponent and be stationary to draw a charge. Otherwise it should be a blocking foul.
• Secondary defenders (help defenders) moving forward or to the side are also in violation, and these should be blocking fouls.
• Contact that is “through the chest” is not de facto proof of a charge. The rule in its entirety must be considered before determining a foul.
• In some cases, it appears that a defender is being rewarded solely for being outside the arc, without considering the other aspects of the rules.

The committee plans a more thorough review of several other areas during the next year and will continue to develop better guidance for officials as needed

[Raymond]

More from Arbiter.

Sportsmanship

Both committees also recommended more stringent adherence to officiating guidelines regarding bench decorum by coaches and bench personnel next season.

Committee members believe the following behaviors hurt the image of the game and should result in a technical foul against the coach or other bench personnel:
• Comments directed at or referring to any game official that question the integrity of an official (repeated references to the number of fouls called against each team; suggesting an official is cheating” a team, etc.).
• Profane, vulgar, threatening, or derogatory remarks or personal comments relating to race, ethnicity, religion, gender or sexual orientation directed at or referring to any game official or opposing player/bench personnel.
• Prolonged, negative responses to a call/no-call that are disrespectful or unprofessional and include waving or thrashing the arms in disgust, dramatizing contact by re-enacting the play, or running or jumping “in disbelief” over a call/non-call.
• A negative response to a call/no-call that includes approaching/charging an official in a hostile, aggressive or otherwise threatening manner; emphatically removing one’s coat in response to a call/no-call; or throwing equipment or clothing on to the floor.
• Continual criticism during a game regarding the same incident after being warned by an official.

Committee members understand that there will be spontaneous reactions to calls, but they don’t want coaches to cross the line with officials.

“Emotion is a big part of the game, and you don’t want to take it out of the game,” Dunne said. “But you can still be emotional without displaying unsportsmanlike behavior.”

The Men’s College Basketball Officiating, LLC Board of Managers assisted and supported the development of more specific guidelines in this initiative. The MCBO, composed of NCAA conference commissioners, was developed to encourage consistent officiating nationally.

[JRutledge]

This is not official yet right? I always forget if the there can be a rejection of these recommendations.

Peace

[Raymond]

Correct JRut, the committees are meeting right now, this is some the stuff that has come up in discussions.

[Raymond]

The NCAA Central Hub actually linked media responses to the recommendations:

NCAA wants crackdown on coaches' antics - College Basketball Nation Blog - ESPN

Andy Katz's Daily Word: NCAA rules committee passes recommendation on consistency of floors on the court -- college basketball - ESPN

NCAA moves to ditch court decals - College Basketball Nation Blog - ESPN

Addressing slippery decal issue took long, but it's not too late - NCAA Division I Mens Basketball - CBSSports.com News, Scores, Stats, Schedule and RPI Rankings