What rule would you change?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

The basket interference/goaltending multiple violation "choice" can be easily fixed. I'm not sure that this one (above) can be easily fixed, unless the NFHS comes up with a casebook play that tells us which violation to call.

I don't see that anyone, other than you, is interested in "fixing" either one.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I don't see that anyone, other than you, is interested in "fixing" either one.

Well, there is one case where the choice between GT and BI matters.....a FT. The penalty if it is GT includes a technical foul while BI is only a violation. It may not be common but I have seen GT on a FT before....in an NCAA D1 conference tourney game even.

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Well, there is one case where the choice between GT and BI matters.....a FT. The penalty if it is GT includes a technical foul while BI is only a violation. It may not be common but I have seen GT on a FT before....in an NCAA D1 conference tourney game even.

I was going to bring this point up as well. Leaving "outside the cylinder" would simplify things. On the way up or down, in the cylinder is BI.