NCAA Men's Potential Rule changes

[Pantherdreams]

My best guess is that it is the NFHS solution to not having an RA.

THey want really airborne kids to be able to know when the where contact is going happen so they can land or brace appropriately. ie. Don't want kids moving in and under late trying to get charges and endangering airborne shooters. Now the kid knows if they are not there and stationary that its too late and you hopefully end with less crashes.

Think it would be adjusted as a player safety thing. Just a guess. Same reason FIBA in my province went to using the NCAA style interp on charges to the gather. Just wanted less kids trying to create crashing situations and calling more blocks when kids do.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

My best guess is that it is the NFHS solution to not having an RA.

This is an NCAA Rules change, not a NF Rules change. The NF rule actually makes sense.

Peace

I think we should withhold judgement and speculation until the actual language is released. I doubt Greg Johnson is a referee or rules person, and anticipate the rule simply reverting to the previous language.

[tjones1]

ACC will adopt a 30-second shot clock in exhibition games next season.

Originally Posted by tjones1

ACC will adopt a 30-second shot clock in exhibition games next season.

So will the SEC. Link

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

My best guess is that it is the NFHS solution to not having an RA.

THey want really airborne kids to be able to know when the where contact is going happen so they can land or brace appropriately. ie. Don't want kids moving in and under late trying to get charges and endangering airborne shooters. Now the kid knows if they are not there and stationary that its too late and you hopefully end with less crashes.

Think it would be adjusted as a player safety thing. Just a guess. Same reason FIBA in my province went to using the NCAA style interp on charges to the gather. Just wanted less kids trying to create crashing situations and calling more blocks when kids do.

You know, if you call more charges, you get the same result.

[Pantherdreams]

Originally Posted by Adam

You know, if you call more charges, you get the same result.

True . . but fans don't come to see charges.

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

True . . but fans don't come to see charges.

That's right, they come to see me call charges

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

True . . but fans don't come to see charges.

I'm told they don't come to see blocks, either.

And judging by the crowd reactions I get, the crowd's reaction to this call is affected by their allegiance to the players, not to wether it's a block or charge. IOW, they're there to see their team do well on offense and defense.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Adam

I'm told they don't come to see blocks, either.

And judging by the crowd reactions I get, the crowd's reaction to this call is affected by their allegiance to the players, not to wether it's a block or charge. IOW, they're there to see their team do well on offense and defense.

Exactly.


And some do appreciate good defense....where good defense is defined as preventing the opponent from getting where they want to go.

[JetMetFan]

So...I got a note from my Friendly Neighborhood Interpreter. Granted, he's on the NCAAW side but he follows NCAAM and speaks with their powers-that-be.

MTDS, it wasn't a matter of the rule being poorly written. The adjustment to the rule means if the defender takes a step backwards and there is contact the correct call would be a block against the defender.

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

So...I got a note from my Friendly Neighborhood Interpreter. Granted, he's on the NCAAW side but he follows NCAAM and speaks with their powers-that-be.

MTDS, it wasn't a matter of the rule being poorly written. The adjustment to the rule means if the defender takes a step backwards and there is contact the correct call would be a block against the defender.

That's outrageous.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

So...I got a note from my Friendly Neighborhood Interpreter. Granted, he's on the NCAAW side but he follows NCAAM and speaks with their powers-that-be.

MTDS, it wasn't a matter of the rule being poorly written. The adjustment to the rule means if the defender takes a step backwards and there is contact the correct call would be a block against the defender.

Please tell me that this is only on the NCAA-M side, and not on the NCAA-W side!!!

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

MTDS, it wasn't a matter of the rule being poorly written. The adjustment to the rule means if the defender takes a step backwards and there is contact the correct call would be a block against the defender.

Jimminy, it's as if somebody on the NCAA-M side got a hold of a document about common rule myths and decided it'd be a good idea to start implementing them as actual rules.