New rule APPROVED!

[wyldkatzky]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=2463718

Also a very big rule with football included. And some minor stuff about DivII and DivIII.

Like I said, no more flying out of bounds timeouts. I just hope he don't get this to bite us in the rear now that it's done with.

[scathendo]

i really don't understand what's wrong with calling a timeout if your in the air but have possesion of the ball and can clearly signal to the ref.

the biggest BS rule that needs to be changed is the possesion arrow rather than jump ball.

[Will Lavender]

scathendo wrote: i really don't understand what's wrong with calling a timeout if your in the air but have possesion of the ball and can clearly signal to the ref.

the biggest BS rule that needs to be changed is the possesion arrow rather than jump ball.

Problem with the flying-out-of-bounds-call-timeout rule is that it's arbitrary by nature. The referee cannot possibly see ball, feet, and time-out signal at the same time. In a lot of instances, you get the ref guessing -- which is never good.

I agree with you that the jump ball is a bad rule, but first I think the charge circle is a needed change (no more charges taken directly under the hoop), and also the three point line needs moved back to the International distance.

[I. Melvin]

Never quite understood Vitale's mania when it comes to the jump ball rule. His main bleat seems to be that half of the time the defense is not rewarded with possession.

Fair enough. But if Ramel ties up Noah, who is gonna get the ball 90% of the time on a jump ball?

Possession arrow has a subtle organizing affect on the game. We have enough stoppages as it is.

Agree 100%, Will, on the charge/block circle.

[UKCATZFAN]

i think the NO CHARGE ARC is one of the most idiotic things ever in basketball:thumbdown:thumbdown:thumbdown

a charge is a charge is a charge

how about no foul can be called if in the back court?????:shrug::shrug::shrug::shrug:

how about no foul inside the 3 point line?????:shrug::shrug::shrug::shrug::shrug:

[Cincy110]

i think the NO CHARGE ARC is one of the most idiotic things ever in basketball:thumbdown:thumbdown:thumbdown

a charge is a charge is a charge

I disagree. How can you take a charge standing underneath the basket??? You need to be in front of the basket is some capacity. If you slide under the basket and have your feet set, that is not defending your goal, that is pretending to play defense. The whole reason for a charge is that you are in the act of defending your goal and you are not defending your goal if you are standing under the basket.

[Cincy110]

I think one rule that needs to be put into play is calling fouls on the defender if they "flop"

Play Defense, quit trying to manipulate the rules.

[I. Melvin]

Battier would have averaged about five minutes a game. ;)

[Will Lavender]

UKCATZFAN wrote: a charge is a charge is a charge

Unless it's a block.

[EricBigNally]

Cincy110 wrote: I think one rule that needs to be put into play is calling fouls on the defender if they "flop"

Play Defense, quit trying to manipulate the rules.




In one of my grade school games, a player from the other team "flopped" before contact was made and the ref called a technical on him for it. I basically had free reign under the basket then as I was fairly large gradeschool player...

Personally, I don't really care about the charge arc one way or the other. The two that really got me was calling TO while going out of bounds (fixed thankfully) and I would still like to see the possession arrow changed. One thing would be to simply do a jump ball or you could reward defense and change it to where it always is a change of possesion. I don't know how to fix it but I don't like the game of change with the possession arrow.

[AugustaDan]

UKCATZFAN wrote: i think the NO CHARGE ARC is one of the most idiotic things ever in basketball:thumbdown:thumbdown:thumbdown

a charge is a charge is a charge

how about no foul can be called if in the back court?????:shrug::shrug::shrug::shrug:

how about no foul inside the 3 point line?????:shrug::shrug::shrug::shrug::shrug:

I don't really understand your perspective. The rules in basketball are completely and totally made up. There is no fundamental theorem of charging that defines what a charge is. If it makes sense to put in the charge circle because players sliding under people driving to the basket are not defending anything at all and are dangerous, then put in the rule because it's better for the game.

It doesn't make any sense to both call the no charge arc "nonsense" and then to refer to the 3 point line, which is another totally arbitrary line drawn on the court. After all, a shot is a shot is a shot. Why should there be these idiotic shots that are worth more?

[rickdacatkilla]

Will Lavender wrote:
Problem with the flying-out-of-bounds-call-timeout rule is that it's arbitrary by nature. The referee cannot possibly see ball, feet, and time-out signal at the same time. In a lot of instances, you get the ref guessing -- which is never good.

I agree with you that the jump ball is a bad rule, but first I think the charge circle is a needed change (no more charges taken directly under the hoop), and also the three point line needs moved back to the International distance.

What Will said....

[I. Melvin]

Ball-Line Defense becomes viable again if this happens. Until then ...

FCFS82 wrote: Move the three point line back to 21 feet and I will be a happy man.

[wyldkatzky]

I just thought of this, but next year if someone tries to call a time out while flying OB or falling into backcourt will the refs just ignore it, or give the team a technical?

[jrodw8]

ALl I can say is this is a welcome change, And I would think the ref would just ignore them, I can't see how you'd penealize a guy for calling a timeout in a situation like that, unless of course they are out of them.

[Littlemeyer]

wyldkatzky wrote: I just thought of this, but next year if someone tries to call a time out while flying OB or falling into backcourt will the refs just ignore it, or give the team a technical?

I would imagine that it would just be ignored....same as if in a scramble situation, either team trying to call timeout is ignored until one of them establishes possession.

Good rule change. :thumbup

[scathendo]

Will Lavender wrote: scathendo wrote: i really don't understand what's wrong with calling a timeout if your in the air but have possesion of the ball and can clearly signal to the ref.

the biggest BS rule that needs to be changed is the possesion arrow rather than jump ball.

Problem with the flying-out-of-bounds-call-timeout rule is that it's arbitrary by nature. The referee cannot possibly see ball, feet, and time-out signal at the same time. In a lot of instances, you get the ref guessing -- which is never good.

I agree with you that the jump ball is a bad rule, but first I think the charge circle is a needed change (no more charges taken directly under the hoop), and also the three point line needs moved back to the International distance.

the refs have to keep and eye on several things at once on most calls.like i said 'clearly signal to the ref' if it's not clear don't award the timeout. what amazesme is how many timeouts teams sacrificewhen it's really not necessary. when the game is on the line and you need the possession, it's a good play. but if there is plenty of game left, just try to save the ball back in bounds and hope one of your teammates can get to it.

[FatCatDaddy]

I am glad they made this rule. In my opinion, unless you have feet on the floor you don't truly have possession of the ball.

[SunBaller]

FatCatDaddy wrote: I am glad they made this rule. In my opinion, unless you have feet on the floor you don't truly have possession of the ball.
I agree with that. Either get rid of the OofB Timeout or make it a requirement thata player/coachmustjump up in the air and have your feet off the flooreverytime any timeout is called.:lol::lol::lol::lol:

[scathendo]

FatCatDaddy wrote: I am glad they made this rule. In my opinion, unless you have feet on the floor you don't truly have possession of the ball.
sorry but that's just not correct. for football yes...basketball no... a major part of basketball takes place in the air. if you needed to be on the ground to establish possession then as soon as you took off to dunk or lay it up or before you came down to the ground after a rebound people could hack away at you. in basketball you can have possesion of the ball while still in the air. if you have not yet come down out of boundsk why shoudn't you be able to call a timeout?

[HOMEYCAT]

I think "the flop" is bogus. You can take a charge without a "Lookat me! Look at me!"

In fact, I think a flopper ought to be warned, and on second offense, T'd........

[FatCatDaddy]

scathendo wrote: FatCatDaddy wrote: I am glad they made this rule. In my opinion, unless you have feet on the floor you don't truly have possession of the ball.
sorry but that's just not correct. for football yes...basketball no... a major part of basketball takes place in the air. if you needed to be on the ground to establish possession then as soon as you took off to dunk or lay it up or before you came down to the ground after a rebound people could hack away at you. in basketball you can have possesion of the ball while still in the air. if you have not yet come down out of boundsk why shoudn't you be able to call a timeout?
Once you leave the floor fora dunk or layup you lose possession. Once you enter the air you must get rid of the ball before you land again or it is a travel. Thus, you do not have possession in the air. When you catch the ball in the air you do not have possession until you land on the floor.

[scathendo]

i repeat.... when you take off for a dunk or layup you have possession of the ball while in the air. ...that's why you get free throws if your fouled.

i'm well aware that you must get rid of the ball before you come back down. that's why i used the conjunction 'or' when remarking about rebounding.

when you rebound the ball you have possession of the ball before you come down. (and your allowed to land without it being traveling)

if you have possession of the ball you should be able to call a timeout.

the real question is why so many teams wasted timeouts when it was not needed instead of saving them for critical possessions.

where is lighthouse?... we need a clarification on possession.

[Will Lavender]

scathendo wrote: the real question is why so many teams wasted timeouts when it was not needed instead of saving them for critical possessions.

Every possession is critical. What makes a possession :20 into the game more critical than a possession with :20 left in the game? It's still 2 or 3 points on the scoreboard any way you cut it.

[ColoradoWildcat]

If you are not in control of your body how can you be in control of the ball? Great rule change. One less thing to yell about next year. Now if they would just make a rule banning Vital and Packer, life would be great!

[chworld22]

I for one am really excited about this rule change. It shows hussle to try this but like another poster said how can the ref possibly be able to see all of what has to happen to make that a legal play. I was playing in theh Streetball Louisivlle and this guy did it twice and I was standing on the line out of bounds while my sub was playing and I know for sure on the first one the guy had an entire foot out of bound when he grabbed the ball but the court monitor couldn't see that all he saw was he had the ball in the air. YES this happened in Streetball! It is just one example of what the overall problem is with calling the timeout while flying out of bounds.

[blewis18]

FatCatDaddy wrote: scathendo wrote: FatCatDaddy wrote: I am glad they made this rule. In my opinion, unless you have feet on the floor you don't truly have possession of the ball.
sorry but that's just not correct. for football yes...basketball no... a major part of basketball takes place in the air. if you needed to be on the ground to establish possession then as soon as you took off to dunk or lay it up or before you came down to the ground after a rebound people could hack away at you. in basketball you can have possesion of the ball while still in the air. if you have not yet come down out of boundsk why shoudn't you be able to call a timeout?
Once you leave the floor fora dunk or layup you lose possession. Once you enter the air you must get rid of the ball before you land again or it is a travel. Thus, you do not have possession in the air. When you catch the ball in the air you do not have possession until you land on the floor.
FatCat you are making his point. You can only be called for a travel when you have possession of the ball or else it wouldn't be a travel.

[scathendo]

Will Lavender wrote: scathendo wrote: the real question is why so many teams wasted timeouts when it was not needed instead of saving them for critical possessions.

Every possession is critical. What makes a possession :20 into the game more critical than a possession with :20 left in the game? It's still 2 or 3 points on the scoreboard any way you cut it.

you have more possesion left :20 seconds into the game. so why waste a timeout... try to save the ball to a teammate; if you can't get back on defense and try to make a stop. with :20 seconds left in the game you may not have time to try and get a stop and if you wasted all your timeouts your screwed.

[scathendo]

ColoradoWildcat wrote: If you are not in control of your body how can you be in control of the ball? Great rule change. One less thing to yell about next year. Now if they would just make a rule banning Vital and Packer, life would be great!

when i was younger and in alot better shape, i was always in control of my body while i was in the air unless i was fouled. what really seperates guys at the level of basketball that we are talking aboutis just how much they are in control of their body while airborne. i've seen plenty of times where it was obvious that a guy is in complete control of his body, has the ball in his possession, turns while in the air going out of bounds towards the court and signals a timeout in the same manner as if he was standing on the ground in bounds or on the floor after recovering a loose ball.

the arguement that the ref can't see enough to make the call is just so applicable to so many situations in the game that if you follow that logic a ton of rules would have to be tossed out. take just about any rebounding situation....is there goal tending, basket interference, was legal position maintained, was there illegal contact down low. was a guy camping out in the lane for more than three seconds to get position...on and on... basketball moves at such a pace that the ref's make tough calls all the time. again i will say....the refs shouldn't call it if they didn't clearly see it. that goes for any call...

[UKSam]

Littlemeyer wrote:
I would imagine that it would just be ignored....same as if in a scramble situation, either team trying to call timeout is ignored until one of them establishes possession.



Which brings up one of the things that I hate. Players on the floor wallering around without being charged with travelling. No need to change the rule..........just enforce it.