6 Fouls?

[sandgk]

To quote the wife when she first heard this idea last night:
"I don't see 6 fouls or five making any real difference. The problem is that they don't call the game by the rules, and they don't call the rules with consistency. If they were serious about calling the game by the rules players would be getting called for palming the ball. They aren't, because the refs don't call it, because the refs aren't serious about calling to the rules."

 

[bkochmc]

Instead of having 6 fouls, why not add another official or two? This would add better floor coverage, officials wouldn't be out of position as much, and more eyes would see what is going on.

 

[crazybuckfan40]

Instead of having 6 fouls, why not add another official or two? This would add better floor coverage, officials wouldn't be out of position as much, and more eyes would see what is going on.

First this would be a reason for more off the ball fouls to be called, and that was one of the reason being given for adding a 6th foul, was due to them adding the 3rd ref a couple years ago and now more eyes see more fouls...

I don't know that a 6th foul would call for more fouls, unles sof course you are playing against teams like us and have big guys that are otherwise unstoppable at times and struggles at the foul line...

My problem, is like the GTown game, when Oden got the moving screen foul, and the charge call. First they were both ticky tack fouls, second instead of the guy playing defense on the second one all he did was act like Oden made him fall backwards ten yards, and I don't see a reason to call a moving screen unless of course you crush the guy and you are not absolutely set. You could make the moving screen call all the time and it was like the refs decided they would give Oden them shitty calls all within 1:30 into the game...

Then last night, Conley was guarding the guy 40 ft from the basket and while there might of been contact, it isnt like he was mugging the guy or knocked him down and they gave him a foul...If they are going to call this ticky tack stuff it doesnt allow the guys to be physical and forces you to let he guy go around you if you feel you will make contact at all...

 

[smith288]

With an unlimited foul rule, I could see a "free throws and the ball" after a certain number then a "3 free throws for a normal bonus foul and 4 for a 3pt foul and the ball"

that would eliminate the hack job on people like Oden.

 

[crazybuckfan40]

With an unlimited foul rule, I could see a "free throws and the ball" after a certain number then a "3 free throws for a normal bonus foul and 4 for a 3pt foul and the ball"

that would eliminate the hack job on people like Oden.

I could see something like this...

But you could have a 6th foul result in 2 shots and the ball...

 

[jimotis4heisman]

or you could go back to having officials officiate a zone and not the ball. sometimes its good to reinvent the wheel. other times its good to go back to the wheel...

 

[crazybuckfan40]

or you could go back to having officials officiate a zone and not the ball. sometimes its good to reinvent the wheel. other times its good to go back to the wheel...

Any way you look at it, something needs to be done, b/c I hate it when the game is effected by foul calls...

 

[jimotis4heisman]

Any way you look at it, something needs to be done, b/c I hate it when the game is effected by foul calls...

i have no problem with that.

assuming a level of consistency is present. so the game/teams/players can adjust.

 

[crazybuckfan40]

i have no problem with that.

assuming a level of consistency is present. so the game/teams/players can adjust.

Exactally, I think that is what most fans would love to see is consistency, and if we are not going to get that then they need to do soemthing for when some officials decide to dictate the game by their whistle...

 

[bkochmc]

First this would be a reason for more off the ball fouls to be called, and that was one of the reason being given for adding a 6th foul, was due to them adding the 3rd ref a couple years ago and now more eyes see more fouls...

Yes, more fouls may be called but it may lend to more consistency, which is really the root of most frustration. Yes, officials can call a game tight but if they are consistent on both sides of the ball not as much complaining would be done. Unfortunately, the officiating in the tournament was very inconsistent DURING the games.

or you could go back to having officials officiate a zone and not the ball. sometimes its good to reinvent the wheel. other times its good to go back to the wheel...

i have no problem with that.

assuming a level of consistency is present. so the game/teams/players can adjust.

I agree with both of jo's points.

 

[crazybuckfan40]

Yes, more fouls may be called but it may lend to more consistency, which is really the root of most frustration. Yes, officials can call a game tight but if they are consistent on both sides of the ball not as much complaining would be done. Unfortunately, the officiating in the tournament was very inconsistent DURING the games.

I understand that could lead to more consistency, but if they start calling it tight, guy will start getting into foul trouble and fouling out like flys...There is going to be contact no matter what, half these kids grow up playing at the local Y or on the playground, where they call their own fouls and they play physical...I think there needs to be a motto of we are going to let these kids play.

 

[bkochmc]

I understand that could lead to more consistency, but if they start calling it tight, guy will start getting into foul trouble and fouling out like flys...There is going to be contact no matter what, half these kids grow up playing at the local Y or on the playground, where they call their own fouls and they play physical...I think there needs to be a motto of we are going to let these kids play.

I understand that there will be contact in basketball as that is how the game as evolved, but where do you draw the line of "letting them play"? Unfortunately that line differs from official to official... the concept can be very fluid. As long as I see consistency during the course of the entire game, including at the end of tight games, I won't complain about the officiating (much ).

The other question that comes to mind: Why should hand-checking (little contact) in the back-court be stressed but then allow the big men to get physical?

 

[crazybuckfan40]

I understand that there will be contact in basketball as that is how the game as evolved, but where do you draw the line of "letting them play"? Unfortunately that line differs from official to official... the concept can be very fluid. As long as I see consistency during the course of the entire game, including at the end of tight games, I won't complain about the officiating (much ).

That is the thing if you bring in another official you are going to have more room for error, b/c you are going to have 4 guys blowing whistle instead of just 3.

The other question that comes to mind: Why should hand-checking (little contact) in the back-court be stressed but then allow the big men to get physical?

I hate the hand-checking the call out on top, unless there is obvious contact that is not allowing the offensive player to be able to get to the spot they are trying to get I don't see a problem...

 

[BB73]

Two rule changes I've wanted for years:

Go to a 30-second shot clock, and eliminate the 5-second rule.

College women play with a 30-second shot clock, I think the guys can handle it. With a 30-second shot clock, play good team defense for 30, instead of good on-the-ball defense for 5, if you want a stop.

This would free up the refs from constantly having to count, to decide if the defender is close enough for a 5-second call, and if the ball is being advanced. Eliminate them from having to look at all of that stuff because of the stupid 5-second rule, and free them up to call the other stuff that's more important.

I saw a 5-second rule called a couple times this season when the team had the ball with the shot-clock off. They weren't stalling, they were playing for the last shot, and lost the ball because 1 defender stayed close to the ball. It's a rule the game should get rid of, in conjunction with a move to the 30-second shot clock.

I think 6 fouls would make the game more of a hack-fest, and that 3 refs are enough.

One other pet peeve - get the coaches off of the damn court!

 

[bkochmc]

That is the thing if you bring in another official you are going to have more room for error, b/c you are going to have 4 guys blowing whistle instead of just 3.

More officials = more chances to get the call right
More officials = more chances for error

Both stances are right and both stances are wrong, depending on your view. As I mentioned, I don't care if there is 3 or 4 or however many officials, just call the game consistent.

I hate the hand-checking the call out on top, unless there is obvious contact that is not allowing the offensive player to be able to get to the spot they are trying to get I don't see a problem...

I'm in agreement here... Every year the NCAA wants to crack down on hand-checking but they also want to let the big men play. I believe these two extremes (if you will) help to create the inconsistency of the calls.

Two rule changes I've wanted for years:

Go to a 30-second shot clock, and eliminate the 5-second rule.

I agree with both of these. The 30 seconds should be plenty of time to work for and get a shot off. I believe the 5-second rule was originally put in place before the shot clock was introduced to provide an incentive to play on-the-ball defense... it is obsolete with the shot clock (but still a good rule in high school until they adopt a shot clock).