NCAA Men's Potential Rule changes

[Texref]

Men?s Basketball Committee adjusts criteria for calling charges, blocks | NCAA Public Home Page - NCAA.org

[JRutledge]

So let me make sure I understand this correctly. Is the NCAA going back to the previous rule for block-charge plays with an airborne shooter(passer)?

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

So let me make sure I understand this correctly. Is the NCAA going back to the previous rule for block-charge plays with an airborne shooter(passer)?

Peace

Seems like it to me.

The rational seems to be that they are indicating that there was just too much inconsistency due to the very subjective nature of upward motion vs. the absoluteness of on/off the floor. Some predicted that, IIRC.

I would hope, however, that they really don't mean "any" movement (other than vertical) makes it a block. I would hope they would allow for a defender to step backwards to soften the impact if they were in position in time.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Seems like it to me.

The rational seems to be that they are indicating that there was just too much inconsistency due to the very subjective nature of upward motion vs. the absoluteness of on/off the floor. Some predicted that, IIRC.

I would hope, however, that they really don't mean "any" movement (other than vertical) makes it a block. I would hope they would allow for a defender to step backwards to soften the impact if they were in position in time.

Camron, I hope that as well but it really sounds as though that's what this means. I'm sure there will be clarification in the coming months but not allowing a defender to move back to protect himself would be...well, not good. Maybe it's a way to try to address flops/near-flops?

[deecee]

how hard is it to get this right? It's been in basketball since forever.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I already see a problem with the potential rule change. This sentence from the press release bothers me:

"In order to take a charge, the alteration will require a defending player to be in legal guarding position before the airborne player leaves the floor to pass or shoot. Additionally, the defending player is not allowed to move in any direction before contact occurs (except vertically to block a shot)."

Just what does the sentence in red mean? Does it mean that a defender who has established a LGP prohibited from moving to maintain his position?

MTD, Sr.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I already see a problem with the potential rule change. This sentence from the press release bothers me:

"In order to take a charge, the alteration will require a defending player to be in legal guarding position before the airborne player leaves the floor to pass or shoot. Additionally, the defending player is not allowed to move in any direction before contact occurs (except vertically to block a shot)."

Just what does the sentence in red mean? Does it mean that a defender who has established a LGP prohibited from moving to maintain his position?

MTD, Sr.

It means once the shooter is airborne, the defender can't move. It's just not written terribly well.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Rich

It means once the shooter is airborne, the defender can't move. It's just not written terribly well.

But, at least by current and past rules, that wasn't was required and I don't see that it is really necessary. Who cares if a player moves if they had position by the necessary time as long as that movement does not move them INTO the path or towards the opponent. I am one that lateral movement should only be penalized if it is what creates the contact. If it is a matter of being hit on the left side of the chest vs the right but the defender was going to get hit either way, why should it matter.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Rich

It means once the shooter is airborne, the defender can't move. It's just not written terribly well.

It is so poorly written that it could mean that player with LGP could not move backwards without being charged with a blocking foul. There really nothing wrong with the way guarding was defined prior to the 2013-14 season.

MTD, Sr.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

It is so poorly written that it could mean that player with LGP could not move backwards without being charged with a blocking foul. There really nothing wrong with the way guarding was defined prior to the 2013-14 season.

MTD, Sr.

It may be what they want, though. Once A1 is airborne, B2 must be still. Maybe it's poorly written, maybe it's an effort to eliminate flopping, maybe they just want their players to "take it". Who knows?

[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.

[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.