Rule experiments - NIT

Discuss the MVC hoops season here.

Re: Rule experiments - NIT

Postby uniftw » February 15th, 2017, 1:21 pm

I despise moving the ball up court on a time out.

I'm torn on the idea of getting rid of the 1-1 and resetting fouls. I'd rather see the 1-1 stick around for fouls 5, 6, and 7 and go to double bonus at 8. Though 8 fouls in a quarter could be hard to do, sans end of game situations.

I also don't really like fouling at the end of the game. I know it's part of it, but starting calling it what it is - it's an intentional foul. But they got rid of that rule. 99% of end of game extending fouls are blatantly intentional. I hate it.
uniftw
MVC Hall Of Famer
MVC Hall Of Famer
 
Posts: 2408
Joined: January 20th, 2011, 9:01 pm

Re: Rule experiments - NIT

Sponsor

Sponsor
 

Re: Rule experiments - NIT

Postby SubGod22 » February 15th, 2017, 4:32 pm

uniftw wrote:I despise moving the ball up court on a time out.

I'm torn on the idea of getting rid of the 1-1 and resetting fouls. I'd rather see the 1-1 stick around for fouls 5, 6, and 7 and go to double bonus at 8. Though 8 fouls in a quarter could be hard to do, sans end of game situations.

I also don't really like fouling at the end of the game. I know it's part of it, but starting calling it what it is - it's an intentional foul. But they got rid of that rule. 99% of end of game extending fouls are blatantly intentional. I hate it.


Moving the ball up on a time out is dumb. It was stupid when the NBA did it and it's ridiculous.

I do not like getting away from 1-1. If we're breaking it down by quarters, go with 1-1 at the 5th foul and double at 8. It makes sense and still gives you the end of game pressure of hitting the first FT.

Any half-hearted effort to "make a play" isn't going to be called intentional. Most of the fouls have a defender swiping across the arms and towards the ball or they'll body up a little too aggressive. Yes, it's intentional but it's not really in the spirit of the rule. You still see it called if someone reaches out and grabs the jersey or just shoves someone. I saw one called in a game in the last week or so. I wasn't paying close attention to the game and don't remember who it was but it was called. May have been a B1G game. Nobody wants your basic end of game fouls called intentional. Talk about a shitty way to end games. Sure, games would end quicker, but we'd see fewer comebacks succeed.
www.wheatshockers.com

Government does not solve problems; it subsidizes them.

The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help.

Unemployment insurance is a prepaid vacation for freeloaders.
User avatar
SubGod22
All MVC
All MVC
 
Posts: 769
Joined: August 11th, 2010, 9:37 am
Location: Outside the Dub

Re: Rule experiments - NIT

Postby purple&orange » February 15th, 2017, 8:55 pm

The intentional foul isn't an issue. I'd say start the double bonus at 7, two 1-1s a quarter if you want to keep it in play, which I do. Keeps the pressure fouls and should only be a huge issue at the end of the game anyway. The free throw is the same in middle school as it is in the NBA. An uncontested 15 footer. Same in my grade school gym as any other gym/arena in the country. Knock them down. The defense is giving up something when fouling late, the intentional should only be on dangerous plays with no intent to play the ball.

Moving the ball to the coaches hash is a bad idea. I'm not a huge fan of anything that changes the way the game is played just because it's late in an attempt to manufacture drama. It would certainly make timeouts much more valuable, having 3 chances to move the ball up to the frontcourt, however to take away the Bryce Drew play because they had a timeout isn't worth it......you can't advance the first 39 minutes, why do it now?

Anything that helps the game, especially game flow I am all for. There are plenty of people who don't understand the rules as it is, trying to explain why fouls reset mid half is just another unnecessary thing. I don't like that officials don't count 10 seconds anymore and use the shot clock either.....as an official/umpire I want to be the one counting, making the decision, not relying on someone at the table who might have started the clock a bit early or late. I understand it may not be perfect as the official's 10 might be 9.7 or 10.2, but at least they control it, have consistency with it where when left up to the shot clock operator it's the same thing but with someone who isn't someone who got the job to call a D-I game (no matter how poor we think they are, someone somewhere thinks they are).
purple&orange
MVC Role Player
MVC Role Player
 
Posts: 110
Joined: December 26th, 2010, 4:01 pm

Previous

Return to Missouri Valley Conference Basketball

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 48 guests