Rule Changes Proposed for 09/10 Hoops

The NCAA’s Men’s and Women’s Basketball Rules Committee met in Arizona this week and they have made three commendations for rule changes for the upcoming season:

  • A secondary defender would be prohibited from establishing position in the area from the front of the rim to the front of the backboard, and he would be required to establish position outside that area to draw a charge or player-control foul.
  • The nonsense of substituting for a free throw shooter who has been injured would be changed.  As we have seen repeatedly through the years, this has often resulted in a poor free throw shooter being replaced by a much better shooter.  The proposal would allow the opposing coach to choose the player who would attempt the free throws from the four remaining players on the court.
  • Replay could be used by officials to use a use a monitor in order to review a play and determine if a flagrant foul occurred. When a flagrant foul has not occurred, the committee would allow the officiating crew to penalize a player with an intentional personal or a technical foul for contact.

250px-basketball_keyRegarding the new rule in the paint, I cannot see how this rule will be objectively enforced, and the way I see it, it will be even more of a judgement call than a charge/block foul is already.  The game moves quickly, and referees already have a difficult time seeing the entire court as it is, and whether a player is entirely under the rim, partially under the rim or just outside the forbidden zone will be a tough call to make — especially from an acute angle, which is often where the referees stand during halfcourt sets.  The only way I see to increase the accuracy of this call would be to additionally adopt the restricted ‘paint in the paint’ arc that the NBA has. Refer to the diagram to the right for more info on the differences between the college and the pro game.

As for the foul-shooter rule, this is something long, long overdue.  The injury-substitution rule has been abused for some time and even though it may give a disadvantage to the shooting team, it will eliminate the shenanigans of a player getting ‘hurt’ then being substituted for only to stand at the scorer’s table seconds later ready to come back in.

Finally, the flagrant foul replay seems to be another small step towards in-general replay usage, which I can see the NCAA eventually adopting, particularly in the NCAA Tournament.  For games that are untelevised, even this system would not necessarily be helpful, but it could definitely help the refs make the right call in the long run.

The proposed changes must be approved by the Playing Rules Oversight Panel, which is scheduled to next meet on June 3.

General

22 Responses to Rule Changes Proposed for 09/10 Hoops

  1. Thinkpack17 05/08/2009 at 10:38 AM #

    If this gets passed Duke will drop instantly from #8 Preseason to #19.

  2. ncsslim 05/08/2009 at 10:52 AM #

    This post specifically points to the changes involving the charge and flagrent calls.

    More rule changes due to systemic pressure placed on the poor, just trying to do his job the best he can, referree. Bullshit. Most of the missed calls are easy outs for the weak.

    I realize this will get me nowhere in the debate arena, but show me the tape of the calls we receive to our advantage involving the “old” rules. A short tape indeed. It still comes down to making a competent (in most cases, absolute common sense) call, and if that’s the problem, you can’t legislate the impact (of not having a quality official) out of the game. It won’t change a damn thing, just further excuses for rediculous calls that benefit someone else.

    Maybe they’ll be as brilliant as they were a couple years ago in football and start the clock when the inbounds pass leaves the passers hand…. morons….

  3. jbpackfan 05/08/2009 at 10:58 AM #

    Why can’t they draw the darn arc under there and take referee interpretation and subjectivity out of the equation. Stupid.

  4. GAWolf 05/08/2009 at 11:14 AM #

    ^ Because there’s no need to blur a vested referee’s perception with reality.

    Can they review intentional foul calls, too? That alone might have shifted a couple of our games from one side of the w-l columns to the other this past year.

  5. ppack3 05/08/2009 at 11:27 AM #

    It is called an “over-sight” comittee. That’s what they are paid to do, overlook things.

  6. MP 05/08/2009 at 11:45 AM #

    My thoughts on the potential rule changes:

    1. Good rule (I agree they MUST paint the semicircle). Ditto Thinkpack. Coach K is probably pulling every card he’s got up his sleeves to prevent this. Maybe he’ll leverage the Olympics gold medal to get this rule sent back to committee.

    2. Good rule. You know what would be kind of fun? If they put the remaining four players’ numbers in a cup and let the opposing coach pull one out. Entertaining for the fans and ultimately fair to both teams!

    3. Good rule. Whatever it takes to remove referees’ emotional judgment from determining the outcome of games. We know which teams tend to benefit from referees’ judgment, particularly in the heat of the moment.

  7. El_Duderino 05/08/2009 at 12:05 PM #

    You’ll have to forgive me… I have a newborn so I’m not sure if I heard this correctly …

    In the Bulls/Celtics game where Rajon Rondo fouled Brad Miller, I think they said that Miller had to shoot the free throws or he was done for the game. Another good rule along these lines.

  8. Thinkpack17 05/08/2009 at 12:06 PM #

    “3. Good rule. Whatever it takes to remove referees’ emotional judgment from determining the outcome of games. We know which teams tend to benefit from referees’ judgment, particularly in the heat of the moment.”

    I.E. Courtney Fells’ “Flagrant Foul” at Virginia Tech. That one still stings.

  9. Thinkpack17 05/08/2009 at 12:08 PM #

    “In the Bulls/Celtics game where Rajon Rondo fouled Brad Miller, I think they said that Miller had to shoot the free throws or he was done for the game.”

    Indeed…in the NBA if you are unable to shoot your free throws after a foul you are done for the evening and the opposing coach gets to choose who takes your place at the line.

  10. highstick 05/08/2009 at 12:21 PM #

    I guess “traveling” since isn’t an offense. Wonder who’ll take up Hansborough’s spot?

  11. TOBtime 05/08/2009 at 12:32 PM #

    ^Thinkpack, i thought Ben getting tackled on the last shot with no call was worse.

  12. BJD95 05/08/2009 at 1:21 PM #

    Wow, I usually hate proposed rule changes, but these all make perfect sense.

  13. fullmoon1 05/08/2009 at 1:38 PM #

    Just like the lawmakers in washington, they want to make new “rules” when they don’t enforce ones already on the books sucj as carrying and travelling

  14. ncsslim 05/08/2009 at 2:28 PM #

    “Wow, I usually hate proposed rule changes, but these all make perfect sense.”

    “Just like the lawmakers in washington, they want to make new “rules” when they don’t enforce ones already on the books sucj as carrying and travelling”….

    Well, yes, but the game being played here is that existing rules somehow required the calls go the way they did, not the fact that they were totally blown even with the intent of the existing rules.

    There is nothing whatsoever wrong with the current rules as long as they are a) applied with common sense discretion, and more importantly, b) applied equally across the board.

    Rule changes have never and will never remove the human element from the game. No existing rule required the Fells “flagrant” call in Blacksburg (nor the “intentional” by Melvin against Vandy, etc, etc, etc…), nor multiple other calls that have disportionately hammered us over the recent past. It’s human judgement, pure and simple and rule changes alone won’t fix it. However, make yourself feel good and change away. See how much K (or Roy or…) takes it on the chin.

  15. codebrown 05/08/2009 at 3:42 PM #

    I think the circle underneath the basket is a great change. This would eliminate all the Battiers out there trying to take a charge directly under the basket. Currently, defenders camping under the basket lead too many offensive fouls called and changes the flow of a game too often. Plus, players can really get hurt coming down on the defender.

  16. Pano Fasoulas 05/08/2009 at 7:30 PM #

    Regarding Rule 3. How about using the replay to determine that a flagrant call DIDN’T occur? That’s what we need.

  17. CStanley 05/08/2009 at 8:11 PM #

    I predict all 3 of these to somehow bite us in the ass at some point next season.

  18. Afterglow 05/08/2009 at 9:22 PM #

    Well… it’s just another few things that Duke can get away with, CStanley.

  19. Alpha Wolf 05/08/2009 at 10:13 PM #

    “I think the circle underneath the basket is a great change. ”

    There’s no circle in the college game…check the diagram above. It’s only under the rim itself.

  20. wufpup76 05/09/2009 at 9:56 AM #

    All three proposed rule changes look good – in theory at least.

    #’s 1 and 3 are still open to selective enforcement and subjective interpretation … almost never a good thing when you’re an N.C. State fan ;)

    Of all the things I loathe about the nba, the lane arc is most definitely not one of them … Put it in the college game and end this Duke sh*t now

  21. Greywolf 05/09/2009 at 12:38 PM #

    This suggestion is really stupid, but so what. No charges “collected” by any player not guarding the player with the ball. This includes those “step out” blocking maneuvers used so often by the Holes. Without exception contact initiated by the Hole defender to impede the progress of the opposing player is a blocking call. Point is if you are stepping out to “block” somebody, oblige the player. Call blocking. To hell with “did he get there first, were his feet set, is his coach going to blackball me if I call a block?

    Something needs to be done about the moving screens while we’re reviewing the “rules.” Idea. Enforce the ones we have.

    Let’s get back to basketball, not football played in shorts.

  22. SuperStuff 05/10/2009 at 12:51 PM #

    I’m sick of them changing the rules every year. They only change a rule when someone is smart enough to do things to their advantage. God forbid if someone is smart. Just enforce the rules we already have.

Leave a Reply