Free Throws & Foul Play - The New Rules Suck!

[H2S]

So the alphas at the NCAA agreed that physical play is disrupting the 'flow' (and point totals) of the game...and decided to disrupt the game even further with a slew of new touch foul rules - basically allowing refs to call fouls for breathing in the direction of the guy with the ball.

Latest News - NCAA.org

what a bunch of shit. Point totals haven't risen...the 'FLOW' of games has been slowed down to snail's pace - watching teams walk from one free-throw line to the other free-throw line for half the games...and most games are now running over 2½ hours or more. It's ridiculous. Over 60 FT's during a recent 3-HOUR (are you fucking kidding me? no OT?) Georgetown game.

discuss

 

[tabascojet]

61 fouls 3 hour games are an abortion....

 

[H2S]

Watching the Michigan/Charlotte game right now...the anncrs are sarcastic as hell re: new rules...

so much wasted time 'tele-reviewing'...anncr complained that viewers were seeing more of the ref's (at the scorer's table) back than the players on the court...

one of the anncrs quipped: "should put ads (Chico's Bail Bonds, etc) on his back"

 

[H2S]

61 fouls 3 hour games are an abortion....

180 minutes to play 40 minutes of basketball? That's a hell of a markup.

 

[kramer1]

I bitched about this a few weeks ago on here. It's a disgrace.

 

[H2S]

I bitched about this a few weeks ago on here. It's a disgrace.

you did... sorry...I should have taken the 5 seconds necessary to see your thread (der, and recall reading through it earlier, without adding comment.)

It IS a disgrace...a politically-correct emasculation of a great sport.

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

I see plenty of people griping about the results of the new rules, but I'll pose the same question here, I did in the other thread...

Which rules do you disagree with specifically and why do you disagree with them? I'm not asking about the way it affects the game, or how the rules change the length of the game or the amount of free throws. Those are all consequences of the new rules/enforcement.

I'm just curious to know if anyone actually thinks you should be able to give a guy an arm bar in the paint without a foul being called.

And while I appreciate the hyperbole I can't say that I've seen any egregiously "touchy" or "tacky" fouls called, (any more than previous seasons) and the games I've seen have been called consistently, which has always been my concern. I hate seeing a game where the first half is a bloodbath with no whistles and the second half gets way tighter (or vice versa)

If the coaches and players adjust to the new rules, and the number of fouls and free throws decrease, will you still hate the new rules and enforcement, or do you just disagree with the gist of the rules regardless of the outcome?

 

[JDM]

You should be allowed to bring a baseball bat on the court and use it as a weapon with no foul called.

 

[H2S]

I see plenty of people griping about the results of the new rules, but I'll pose the same question here, I did in the other thread...

Which rules do you disagree with specifically and why do you disagree with them?¹ I'm not asking about the way it affects the game, or how the rules change the length of the game or the amount of free throws. Those are all consequences of the new rules/enforcement.

I'm just curious to know if anyone actually thinks you should be able to give a guy an arm bar in the paint without a foul being called.

And while I appreciate the hyperbole I can't say that I've seen any egregiously "touchy" or "tacky" fouls called², (any more than previous seasons) and the games I've seen have been called consistently, which has always been my concern. I hate seeing a game where the first half is a bloodbath with no whistles and the second half gets way tighter (or vice versa)

If the coaches and players adjust to the new rules³, and the number of fouls and free throws decrease, will you still hate the new rules and enforcement, or do you just disagree with the gist of the rules regardless of the outcome?

¹ Specifically? This:

With these facts in mind, the committee voted to categorize several specific types of contact as fouls. Previously, these contacts were listed only as guidelines for officials. However, at preseason officiating clinics this year, officials were instructed to enforce consistently the following types of contact on players with the ball:

• When a defensive player keeps a hand or forearm on an opponent;
• When a defensive player puts two hands on an opponent;
• When a defensive player continually jabs by extending his arm(s) and placing a hand or forearm on the opponent;
• When a player uses an arm bar to impede the progress of an opponent.

btw...every kid learning the game is taught how to use arm bars both offensively & defensively...not strictly as a battering ram the way you (and the NCAA) seem to be interpreting it.

² Really? Are you watching any games? I've seen plenty of "egregiously touchy/tacky absolute bullshit calls" made already this year.

³ It's entirely likely (again, if you've watched any games, you've surely heard EVERY anncr complain about the new fucking rules - that they've got to be amended/eased-up) the rules will be changed before anybody gets 'used' to them. Until they are changed, I doubt that ANY of the goals the NCAA alphas drafted this shit up to achieve...will be achieved...in the meanwhile, the games are Lower-Scoring, Less-Exciting, extended exercises in frustration (for fans, coaches and players.)

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

H2s, apologies in advance as this is going to come of as snarky, and obnoxious and for once I don't really mean it to be that way, but I don't really have a better way to say it. Having said that...

I guess I should have seen that reply coming, from a guy that cheers for a team who's coach recruits football players, has them practice using football drills and occasionally has them dress in football pads for practice.

B1G Basketball (and to a lesser degree The Conference Formerly Known As The Big East) have always been played as more of a contact sport than the rest of college basketball. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, better or worse, just that it's different, and I believe in the minority. So I understand you like to see a game where they just "let 'em play refs!" It's not my preference, but I get where you're comin' from.

But I'd like to look at the rules you disagree with...

When a defensive player keeps a hand or forearm on an opponent;
Okay, let me ask you this... aside from "it's always been that way" (which is a logical fallacy that I won't bore you with unless you'd like the details) Why does keeping a hand on the opponent make the game batter? Again, not asking about the consequences of enforcing the rule (more fouls, more free throws, longer game, etc) I'm more interested in the intent of the rule itself. How does keeping a hand on the opponent make the game better?

When a defensive player puts two hands on an opponent;
Same question. Why does placing two hand on the opponent make the game better? (Or why does not being allowed to do it make the game worse if you prefer to go at it from that angle)

When a defensive player continually jabs by extending his arm(s) and placing a hand or forearm on the opponent;
Same question...

When a player uses an arm bar to impede the progress of an opponent.
Same question...

As far as point #2 Yes, I've watched plenty of games this year, and yes, I've seen some ticky-tack fouls called, but no more than in previous years. It will depend on which games you're watching but so far it's been about what I would expect for this time of year. (games played on neutral courts seem to be called a little "looser" in general, and home teams seem to get the benefit of a tighter whistle and the occasional "iffy" foul during the cupcake portion of their schedule.)

Regarding #3 I don't usually pay that much attention to the announcers (I often have the volume down because most of them are awful) but in the games where I have listened, I don't recall hearing them complain about the new rules. I've heard them complain about the officiating on occasion (end of the Duke/Vermont game comes to mind) but I haven't heard much complaining about the new rules.

As far as the rules being changed again, they might, but you should consider a few things. The NCAA doesn't give two rat farts about the purity of the game. They're running a business. And at the end of the day as long as that money comes rolling in, they couldn't care less how much you or the announcers complain about what they do. As long as you keep tuning in to watch those games (and lets face it, you and I and nearly everyone else will, because we like the sport too much) they have no incentive to change. If the games continue to run long, then it will annoy the broadcasters as it will be harder to schedule everything, but in the long run, if the game time really does get extended, that just means, more commercial breaks, and more ad revenue for the networks, schools, conferences, NCAA (and pretty much everyone except the athletes) So I wouldn't hold your breath on the rules changing just yet.

 

[Sportsguy9695]

im not a big fan either. Let the kids play

 

[uncfan103]

I haven't noticed the new rules changes really affecting the flow of the game except for the BYU - Stanford game. And that was only because they kept fouling. I'd like to see them play defense with their feet instead of directing and controlling where the offensive player goes on the court. I think it's a good rule and I'd rather see people shoot free throws (even though I'd prefer to watch them play real defense) than see people get shoved out of the way and grabbed and chucked trying to cut to the basket.

Please watch the defense on Kelly Olynyk on the inbounds pass and tell me why you think that should be allowed.

[YOUTUBE]Rp6LBdiX-0g[/YOUTUBE]

 

[H2S]

Trolly...no need to apologize for saying what you think. And, please don't worry about being snarky or sarcastic about disparaging Coach Izzo's recruiting/B1G & BEast play style while leaving yourself immune to retort because you haven't revealed any 'favorite' team(s) of your own. You asked readers to 'be specific' re: which rules we had problems with...I pasted this:

With these facts in mind, the committee voted to categorize several specific types of contact as fouls. Previously, these contacts were listed only as guidelines for officials. However, at preseason officiating clinics this year, officials were instructed to enforce consistently the following types of contact on players with the ball:

• When a defensive player keeps a hand or forearm on an opponent;
• When a defensive player puts two hands on an opponent;
• When a defensive player continually jabs by extending his arm(s) and placing a hand or forearm on the opponent;
• When a player uses an arm bar to impede the progress of an opponent.

There is, imo, a massive sea-change difference between set 'guidelines' (implying what? if not officials' discretion on what constitutes a 'foul contact' vs a 'touch contact') and 'instructions to enforce consistently' the bulleted infractions (which, imo, are all 'foul contacts' that officials would have called in the first damn place.)

In other words, the NCAA (in its self-serving, but -as usual- misdirected, wisdom) chose to emasculate/minimize officials' discretionary management as necessary to ensure a 'purer' brand of basketball - with higher scores and smoother game flow...resulting in lower scores yet, as well as anything but smoother game flow.

As for holding my breath waiting for new rules amendments? haha...not to worry, such is NOT likely to happen this season. Like many fans with teams contending, I'm confident that Izzo (et al other football/basketball coaches) are competent enough to adapt and compete to the new NCAA nonsense.

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

So H2S, with your complaint about taking the discretion away from the officials, is it safe to say that you'd rather the officials decide the outcomes of games instead of the players/coaches? Do you not want these things called at all, or just not called consistently? I'm a little confused by your last comments. You also state that they are fouls that "would have been called in the first damn place" so I'm not sure why instructing officials to call fouls that have always been fouls is a problem? Maybe I'm just not getting your point.

I also don't accept your premise that games are lower scoring now. I'd like to see some data to back that up.

And earlier you stated that you were confident that the rules would be changed again (based on the complaints of sideline commentators) before anyone could adjust, then you reply by saying that you're sure Izzo is competent enough to adapt to the new rules... so which is it? Are coaches and players going to adjust or not?

 

[H2S]

oh...btw...uncfan103?

great win over Louisville!
I'm looking forward (with well-bit tongue) to playing yall again.
It's long past time that ownership papers left Chapel Hill and came to E. Lansing.

 

[H2S]

arguing at cross purposes...

So H2S, with your complaint about taking the discretion away from the officials, is it safe to say that you'd rather the officials decide the outcomes of games instead of the players/coaches? Do you not want these things called at all, or just not called consistently? I'm a little confused by your last comments. You also state that they are fouls that "would have been called in the first damn place" so I'm not sure why instructing officials to call fouls that have always been fouls is a problem? Maybe I'm just not getting your point.

I also don't accept your premise that games are lower scoring now. I'd like to see some data to back that up.

And earlier you stated that you were confident that the rules would be changed again (based on the complaints of sideline commentators) before anyone could adjust, then you reply by saying that you're sure Izzo is competent enough to adapt to the new rules... so which is it? Are coaches and players going to adjust or not?

So Trolly, are you saying you're so obtuse that you don't see the nuanced differences between?:

When a defensive player keeps a hand or forearm on an opponent; "keeps" and "merely touches without impeding."
When a defensive player puts two hands on an opponent; "puts two hands on" and "using both hands to protect established position/possible injury against an obvious charge"
When a defensive player continually jabs by extending his arm(s) and placing a hand or forearm on the opponent; "jabs (punches? shoves?)" and...wtf is the difference between "jabs" and "keeps?"
When a player uses an arm bar to impede the progress of an opponent. "arm bar (with force) impeding progress" of an opponent" and "arm bar (passive) impeding progress" of an opponent."

Officials have always played a role in determining the outcomes of games...albeit, and thankfully, very rarely has their role superseded that of the players in those outcomes. Now? Toss officials' discretion out - insert "instructions to call everything, regardless of circumstances."

Higher scoring/Lower scoring? We'll see somebody's analysis at some time, for sure. In the meanwhile, my impression has it that scoring hasn't moved one way or the other as a result of the new rules. Why? Has yours?

Changing the rules mid-season? Yah, I was parroting what I've already heard anncrs say numerous times ("they've got to ease up some of these new rules")...I know they won't be changing anything. Your last question was facetious...of course coaches and players have to adjust!

 

[wiskyisgood12]

Coaches and players are having a hard time adjusting early on in the season, although it's slowly getting better. Early on no knew how to teach defense, and to be honest, players are probably a little afraid to play defense because they're not too sure what will or won't be called.

One of the unintended early season consequences was games become free throw contests. I think if we see the same issues by March there will probably be some offseason adjustments of the rules.

 

[TrollyMcTroller]

So Trolly, are you saying you're so obtuse that you don't see the nuanced differences between?:

When a defensive player keeps a hand or forearm on an opponent; "keeps" and "merely touches without impeding."

No, I'm well aware of the difference. I'm just curious as to why you think its necessary to keep a hand on the opponent? What about that makes the game better?

When a defensive player puts two hands on an opponent; "puts two hands on" and "using both hands to protect established position/possible injury against an obvious charge"

While I am aware of the difference between the two, I don't think those situations are called much differently than they have been in the past. Generally if you wanted to draw a charge, once position was established, you'd generally see the player stand there in the paint, arms crossed over the chest, (or extended straight up) teeth clenched, and sometimes eyes closed, bracing for impact. If the defensive player hadn't established position and made contact with the body, they'd call it a block, and if they made contact with the hands/arms, they'd call it reaching-in. What's changed? Also, outside of a charging situation (as the rule says nothing about charging) why do you need to put two hands on an opponent? What about that is necessary for the game?

When a defensive player continually jabs by extending his arm(s) and placing a hand or forearm on the opponent; "jabs (punches? shoves?)" and...wtf is the difference between "jabs" and "keeps?"

Well, I suspect if someone were to keep their hand on your windpipe, and jab your windpipe, you'd figure out the difference really quick. (the point of that differentiation, in case you're too obtuse to get it, is not to give a punching loophole in the "don't keep your hand on the opponent" rule. Otherwise you could keep jabbing a guy in the kidney with one hand, and claim that it was okay since you weren't keeping your hand on him) But to be clear, it's a matter of force. And I'm still unsure as to why it would improve the game to allow someone to jab an opponent in the kidney.

When a player uses an arm bar to impede the progress of an opponent. "arm bar (with force) impeding progress" of an opponent" and "arm bar (passive) impeding progress" of an opponent."

Okay you got me there... how do you passively impede an opponent with an arm bar? Every scenario my tiny little mind can dream up involves force on the part of the guy using the arm bar. If no force is applied, how would he impede someone? I'm just guessing, but I'm pretty sure you made that last part up. But it's good to see that you do get the concept of force now.

Officials have always played a role in determining the outcomes of games...albeit, and thankfully, very rarely has their role superseded that of the players in those outcomes. Now? Toss officials' discretion out - insert "instructions to call everything, regardless of circumstances."

So, to be clear, you don't want consistency from the officiating crews? Before they had discretion, now they don't and that's bad according to you. Am I getting that right?

Higher scoring/Lower scoring? We'll see somebody's analysis at some time, for sure. In the meanwhile, my impression has it that scoring hasn't moved one way or the other as a result of the new rules. Why? Has yours?

Well if your impression is that it hasn't moved one way or the other as a result of the new rules, then why did you say:

In other words, the NCAA chose to emasculate/minimize officials' discretionary management as necessary to ensure a 'purer' brand of basketball - with higher scores and smoother game flow...resulting in lower scores yet, as well as anything but smoother game flow.

and

meanwhile, the games are Lower-Scoring,

Which both seem pretty definitive in their "it's a lower scoring game now" stance. Just wondering why the change of heart?

Changing the rules mid-season? Yah, I was parroting what I've already heard anncrs say numerous times ("they've got to ease up some of these new rules")...I know they won't be changing anything. Your last question was facetious...of course coaches and players have to adjust!

So what you're saying is, that the rules will eventually be changed, but they'll change before any coaches or players get used to them, but the coaches and players are going to adjust to them anyway because they have to? Ummm... okay.

 

[redseat]

I haven't noticed the new rules changes really affecting the flow of the game except for the BYU - Stanford game. And that was only because they kept fouling. I'd like to see them play defense with their feet instead of directing and controlling where the offensive player goes on the court. I think it's a good rule and I'd rather see people shoot free throws (even though I'd prefer to watch them play real defense) than see people get shoved out of the way and grabbed and chucked trying to cut to the basket.

Please watch the defense on Kelly Olynyk on the inbounds pass and tell me why you think that should be allowed.

[YOUTUBE]Rp6LBdiX-0g[/YOUTUBE]

To me that IS a foul and I have seen it called plenty of times... No idea why it wasn't in this instance?

 

[geneh_33]

North Carolina is number one. That is all. Thank you. Now let these guys play REAL basketball!