College Basketball Rule Changes Up For Debate
Likely to be recommended
- Laptops, tablets allowed on the bench for coaching purposes only
- Tweak traveling interpretation to universally allow players to Euro step, use spin moves and step-backs
Unlikely to be recommended
- Widening the lane to 16 feet (currently 12 feet)
- Award possession to defense after a held-ball
- Eliminate 10-second backcourt rule
- Allow offensive team to decline free throws in final two minutes and overtime(s); opt for inbound instead
- Eliminate five-second closely guarded rule
- Allow instant replay on shot-clock violation in final two minutes/overtime on a missed shot
- Allow instant replay on basket interference/goaltending calls -- but only if/after an official calls the violation
Which of these would you like to see implemented?
Forgot some of the big ones...
Potential for two-year NIT trial period
- Two-timeout limit per team with under two minutes in regulation and throughout overtime(s)
- Eliminate offensive basket interference and use FIBA rule instead: ball is always live after it makes contact with the rim
Big debates await
- Introduce quasi quarters by resetting team fouls at 10-minute mark of each half. Begin double bonus on fifth foul within each 10-minute segment. This eliminates the one-and-one free throw
- Modified six-foul rule: player is allowed three fouls per half (would be disqualified if they committed four fouls in a half). However, a player can commit two or three first-half fouls and have as many four or three more to use for the remainder of the game, allowing for six total
The six foul rule is without question the worst change that could be implemented.
IIRC, the Big East tried the six foul rule in conference play three-ish decades ago, and it was a f'n disaster. Everyone just fouled a ton.
I would like to see the penalties at the end of games where the trailing team intentionally fouls when in defense to be called as intentional fouls. Offended team shoots free throws and gets the ball back. It's asinine in basketball that your odds of winning increase by massively and repeadly commiting fouls. It would be like in football if the defense lined up offsides in the final minutes the offense had to kick a field goal from where they are and then give the ball to the defense. Stupid. Nobody complains in football when a team takes a knee to run out the clock, let's do that in basketball too.
Or do it like hockey does with a delayed penalty. The offense keeps playing until the penalty commiting team gains possession of the ball. Then you can shoot free throws. I'd like to see that the whole game actually. Would keep the game flowing nicely.
You realize that this would turn all players into Brad Davidson?
hack-a-shaq was such a clever strategy tho
It's asinine in basketball that your odds of winning increase by massively and repeatedly committing fouls.
Exactly. You gain a benefit by committing an illegal act. It's completely against the spirit of the game's rules.
I've said before, the offensive team should have the option of declining the foul (just like in football), and simply inbounding the ball. And if they decline the foul, then it doesn't count against the totals of the defensive team or the fouling player.
And it would keep the last two minutes of the game from taking 10 to play.
Did you like the Jordan Poole - Houston game? How about the Trey Burke - Kansas game?
I don’t really understand why a fan of basketball would take the stance that if your team is down 1 with 30 seconds left or under or 4 points with 59 seconds left and they do not have the ball that the game should be ‘over’, but I guess that’s just me.
Honestly, the whole notion of having to hypothetically inbound the ball 20x in a minute seems crazier than a team having to shoot a few free throws.
how about QB spiking the ball to stop the clock (how is that not intentional grounding)
wherever there are rules, people will find ways to work around them.
For one spiking the ball to stop the clock is specifically legal per the rules.
fouling another player is also addressed in the rules, penalized by three throws, right?
The trailing team can still try to generate turnovers legally. Force the offense into a 10sec violation by playing press. Box them into a corner, tie up the ball. But just swatting their arm as they blow past shouldn't be a valid strategy for trying to get back into a game.
You could just identify obvious intentional fouls and call a common foul when the D us just aggressively going after a steal. Foul when going for the ball is common, and foul while grabbing a player is intentional. Should be easy to identify.
" I don’t really understand why a fan of basketball..."
If you unpack things you'll usually find that you're arguing with a hockey fan who wants basketball to be more like hockey, or a football fan who wants it to be more like football.
This works the other direction too, of course.
And it would keep the last two minutes of the game from taking 10 to play.
Wait, how? Wouldn't the trailing team just keep aggressively defending the inbound and committing fouls until they get a steal? If the winning team keeps declining fouls and inbounding rather than shooting FT, this could go on indefinitely.
If you continually inbound it to a 55% free throw shooter, that would be the case. But if you inbound it to a 90% free throw shooter, then it would be advantageous to accept the free throws.
As long as you keep the foul count running for the fouls that lead to declined free throws (so that defenders can still foul out and the offense can get into the double bonus), it doesn't make much sense to repeatedly foul unless you think you have a great chance of stealing the inbound for some reason.
Yeah, I don't like inbounding. That actually benefits the fouling team more than free throws because inbounding is one of the passes most likely to generate a turnover. Just let the offense keep playing after a foul until the defense touches the ball or gains possession.
This is sort of a silly argument. In every team sport people commit infractions to gain a benefit, most notably when the opponent is likely to score if the player does not commit an infraction. Think a DB tackling a WR who beats them off the line or a soccer defender who commits a foul when the opponent has created a dangerous situation. It is up to the sport to balance the consequences with the reward.
Perhaps basketball needs to up the consequences a bit, but I think the changes proposed tend to be to drastic. I think the NBA shows that the balance is close. If you have better FT shooters like the NBA, you largely prevent the repeated late game fouling. Off the cuff, a solution I would offer is that a backcourt foul in the last minute is a three shot foul. Should at least shorten the game.
I would also allow the fouled team to just run out the remainder of the shot clock and then turn over possession (rather than take free throws) which would be the best move in a lot of circumstances. Another option would be to allow anyone on the floor to take the free throws and not just the fouled player.
The any player takes the free throws is also a good option. Accomplishes the same goal, makes it more likely that the leading team will maintain the lead after an "intentional" foul.
I don't love the shot clock violation. Essentially ends any game with a 4 point lead and over 30 seconds if the leading team can simply maintain possession. Probably leads to a lot of swallowed whistles in that period as the defense has to go all out to cause a TO and any foul is an automatic game ender
I hadn't thought about the swallowing the whistle thing, that's a good point.
I strongly disagree with this. Intentionally fouling is a legit strategy for a losing team can try to get back into a game. If the winning team can't hit their free throws, then tough shit. You may as well just not play the last few minutes of a game
It’s a good debate...
Under the current rules, sure it's a valid strategy. That's why teams do it. But it significantly degrades the quality of the sport for a lot of viewers, myself included. I hate how the end of close games just drags out indefinitely.
But you seem to be advocating that teams should have the ability to essentially just run out the clock and I fail to see how that's any better in terms of quality of play
Like I said above, trailing teams can still try to generate turnovers. If the leading team just stands there not paying attention then steal the ball. Box them in a corner and force an OOB. Dont let them cross midcourt and force a turnover. Just get rid of the absolute drag at the end of games due to endless fouls. And running out the clock is a reward that you earn by playing well for the previous 38 minutes. Just like taking a knee in football. I don't understand the resistance to turning the final 2 minutes into garbage time to remove the most painful part of the game. Actually close games still come down to the wire and the last basket, but a team up by 10 with a minute left, sure let them run out the clock they earned it.
I'd like to be able to challenge called fouls on clean blocks.
Yep!
Is it wrong that my response to all of these (other than the laptop rule) is either hate or dislike?
Anyone calling traveling on a Euro step is a moron. Offensive goaltending should be eliminated.
I don’t understand the traveling rule change. Either you took two steps or three steps.
I don’t see why there should be a “special move” exception.
Agree re: traveling rules. The rules don't discriminate whether the steps were large lateral steps or tiny choppy steps. Pick up your dribble and you can take two steps before it's traveling.
I think the bigger problem is that refs - especially in the NBA - struggle with counting. This loose interpretation just gives refs an excuse to not pay attention and just *shugs* "looked like a euro step"
LeBron (and others) routinely take 4 or more steps and traveling is never called in these situations. Only when a pivot foot is picked up. And even then, when the all stars do it, it is rarely called.
why have a rule when it doesn’t apply to most of the league and never applies to all-stars?
Major reason why NBA is unwatchable for me. Rules / fouls are completely made up on the spot by the ref ... they don’t call half and get the other half completely wrong.
NCAA is mildly better
I’ve always thought it was to protect the image of the league... traveling is seen as something that little kids do on the playground. Don’t want to embarrass the multi-millionaires.
Most of the time, fans do not understand zero step rule. The 2 steps doesn't count until a player has fully gathered the ball in which it count as zero step.
I’m not talking about that. I’m talking about the multiple times per game LeBron and others (LeBron is one of the worst offenders) pick up pivot feet, take 4-5 steps on the way to dunking the ball, catch an inbound pass with both hands and walk 3-4 steps before starting to dribble ..... it’s absurd.
Either get rid of traveling or actually call it.
I think fans struggle to understand the zero gather step rule. They can take as many steps as they want as long as they don't fully gather the ball. You can somewhat pick up the dribble and take 2-3 steps before getting full control of the ball in which it counts as zero step.
I feel like this has changed dramatically over the years though. I didn't see guys taking all these "gather steps" back in the 80's. Was this an NBA rule change at some point? I know for a fact we couldn't do it when I played high school ball.
Personally I strongly dislike the rule. I understand that people don't want travelling called on NBA players, but I feel like it has gotten ridiculous, to the point where dribbling in the NBA is almost optional.
Gather step was introduced in 2009. Personally, I think it helps with the evolution of offense.
I think HS could loosen up the restriction on 2 steps because you can't do much stepback nor euro step in HS level. I've seen legit 2 step moves that were called travel because it looked like a travel to the refs which is dumb.
They're prolly just trying to clarify what constitutes a gather step.
When most fans think something's traveling, it's just the gather step plus the two allotted steps.
My $0.02:
Likely to be recommended
- Laptops, tablets allowed on the bench for coaching purposes only
Fine. I'm not sure I knew they weren't already allowed... They are in football, so why not?
- Tweak traveling interpretation to universally allow players to Euro step, use spin moves and step-backs
What does "universally" mean? If you take 4 steps on a Euro step it's okay? I haven't noticed a lot of travelling calls on these moves.
Unlikely to be recommended
- Widening the lane to 16 feet (currently 12 feet)
Super dumb. If anything the lane should be narrowed a la Kirk Goldsberry's idea for increasing the EV of post play.
- Award possession to defense after a held-ball
I like this but it might be tough on loose balls. If there's a 50/50 scrum somewhere, who is on offense?
- Eliminate 10-second backcourt rule
No. Why?
- Allow offensive team to decline free throws in final two minutes and overtime(s); opt for inbound instead
I agree that something needs to be done about eat your liver time, but I'm not sure this is it. I generally don't like changing the rules of a game at certain points. If you want to disincentivize fouling, learn how to make your free throws. Problem solved. Maybe moving the bonus up to 6 fouls and the double bonus at 8 might help.
- Eliminate five-second closely guarded rule
No. Why?
- Allow instant replay on shot-clock violation in final two minutes/overtime on a missed shot
I don't really understand this one. Is it that if the offense shoots a possible airball and rebounds it but the shot clock buzzer sounds you can review it?
- Allow instant replay on basket interference/goaltending calls -- but only if/after an official calls the violation
No. No more reviews.
Potential for two-year NIT trial period
- Two-timeout limit per team with under two minutes in regulation and throughout overtime(s)
Yes. Fewer timeouts is good.
- Eliminate offensive basket interference and use FIBA rule instead: ball is always live after it makes contact with the rim
I'd like to see this implemented for a trial period.
Big debates await
- Introduce quasi quarters by resetting team fouls at 10-minute mark of each half. Begin double bonus on fifth foul within each 10-minute segment. This eliminates the one-and-one free throw
I don't know what's bad about halves, other than it's unlike every other form of basketball. So I wouldn't mind quarters.
- Modified six-foul rule: player is allowed three fouls per half (would be disqualified if they committed four fouls in a half). However, a player can commit two or three first-half fouls and have as many four or three more to use for the remainder of the game, allowing for six total
No. No incentivizing fouling.
No. Why?
Because there's already a shot clock.
It's a good point--I hadn't thought of it that way. I generally like rewarding good defense but I guess if a team wants to burn 15 seconds behind the midcourt line or hold the ball forever they might as well be allowed to.
two cents?
damn, that's more like a small inheritance.
Need to fix charging... seriously.
Can't be a charge if you are in the air, and the defender is 'establishing position' when you are air borne. It give you zero chance of avoidance imo
Defensively, you need to establish before the offensive player is airborne.
The Gonzaga player taking a charge by Juzang is textbook example of a charge
Honestly, I would do away with charge/block foul rule
I'm old school and think there's still a place in the game for the offensive charge call. LabattsBleu raised the perfect example (Juzang vs. Gonzaga). That should always be a charge.
My slight revision to change the rule is if a defender slides under an offensive player after the offensive player has already left the floor, that blocking call should be penalized as some type of flagrant one (or whatever they call it). Defender gets the foul. Offensive player gets an extra foul shot or offense retains possession after the foul shots. Anything to discourage defenders from sliding under - it's a dangerous play that needs to be discouraged further by punitive actions.
My other rule revision is one that I'll call the Davison Rule. If a defender punches an offensive screener in the nuts, play is immediately halted. The nut punchee gets to fire the basketball directly at the nuts of the nut puncher from a distance of 3.5 feet away.
I would do away with it because it encourage bad defense and it's dangerous for both players involved.