[AlienAiden]

Kanacevic should have been called for a block on Tre Graham.

Never forget.

 

[AlienAiden]

Here's a good test for you AA.

Charge or block?

https://twitter.com/Local12Jed/status/1106717111131492353

That is easy. It is a block.

 

[BrownIndians85]

The shot clock reset is good. It generates more possessions and it doesnt allow teams to get a rebound, kick it out and stand around for 20 more seconds, which isnt good for anybody.


I like the lane being wider because I think the charge arc is too big. Its hard for a defender to guard the hoop and get outside that arc to draw a charge. Now with the offense being forced out a little further, they can get outside the arc easier.

I hadn't thought about that with the lane, are you saying this is because the 3s violation gives the defenders more room underneath?

Regarding block/charge, I'm so sick of seeing late slides under the offensive player - when they have clearly initiated takeoff - being called charges. Same when said offensive player dishes it off. If they're in the act of going airborn whether to shoot or pass, I thought the defender wasn't allowed to late slide like that but we see them called charges all the time. Then inexplicably you'll have a guy clearly set, outside the arc, and get a block call.

They have to make it easier on the officials. I'm not necessarily blaming them, it's a hard job. And that may be one of the hardest calls. But the "draw a charge" mentality pisses me off, and yeah I know Courtney Stockard was one of the best in our league at it, but I'd rather give the defender a little more leeway and get rid of some of those charge calls. I like the cylinder rule, now the defender can go straight up and leave their feet and it's usually play on. Let them play defense, and not have their only out be to draw a charge.

 

[sjhawk13]

Kanacevic should have been called for a block on Tre Graham.

Never forget.

Pfft.

 

[434]

Call me crazy but for the last 10 years I have been on an internal crusade to rid basketball of the charge/block call. Not sure who to contact or how to do it though.

I with you AA. A proposal I heard a long while back that I really liked and try to convince people of is this: Get rid of the charge call all together but keep the blocking foul.

The idea is this: I think refs see contact and feel like they have to make a call, but this can be bang-bang plays so it is hard to get the call right. And when they don't make a call, fans are up in arms because they all saw bodies colliding. So everyone is always upset.

How it would work: Defenders could still take a charge, however there wouldn't be an offensive foul. On the face of it, one might ask what wouldn't stop on offensive player from barreling into a defender. Well, if the defender has position, the outcome is likely for the offensive player to lose control of ball, leading to a potential turnover. Or cause them to miss their attempted shot. So it wouldn't always be in their best interest to just barrel thru guys.

If the defender doesn't have position, then it would still be a blocking foul. If its close, the refs can swallow their whistles and not feel forced to call something.

Flopping would disappear, because flopping would no longer draw a foul and instead lead to open lanes for the offensive player. A flop doesn't force a turnover.

It might lead to more shot blocking attempts, because drawing the charge isn't advantageous anymore. This could lead to more exciting moments.

The only caveat I would have is the charge still would remain for "off ball" actions, ie, after passing the ball, an offensive player couldn't just take out the defender if they have position. In this case, the contact due to the charge couldn't lead to a turnover as the ball has already been passed and the action could lead to a disadvantage for the defending team. That should still be a foul.

 

[ace93]

I with you AA. A proposal I heard a long while back that I really liked and try to convince people of is this: Get rid of the charge call all together but keep the blocking foul.

The idea is this: I think refs see contact and feel like they have to make a call, but this can be bang-bang plays so it is hard to get the call right. And when they don't make a call, fans are up in arms because they all saw bodies colliding. So everyone is always upset.

How it would work: Defenders could still take a charge, however there wouldn't be an offensive foul. On the face of it, one might ask what wouldn't stop on offensive player from barreling into a defender. Well, if the defender has position, the outcome is likely for the offensive player to lose control of ball, leading to a potential turnover. Or cause them to miss their attempted shot. So it wouldn't always be in their best interest to just barrel thru guys.

If the defender doesn't have position, then it would still be a blocking foul. If its close, the refs can swallow their whistles and not feel forced to call something.

Flopping would disappear, because flopping would no longer draw a foul and instead lead to open lanes for the offensive player. A flop doesn't force a turnover.

It might lead to more shot blocking attempts, because drawing the charge isn't advantageous anymore. This could lead to more exciting moments.

The only caveat I would have is the charge still would remain for "off ball" actions, ie, after passing the ball, an offensive player couldn't just take out the defender if they have position. In this case, the contact due to the charge couldn't lead to a turnover as the ball has already been passed and the action could lead to a disadvantage for the defending team. That should still be a foul.

A good play to run would be to have a big run into the defender under the basket as he hands it off to a guard who scores.

I don't see a potential turnover as being enough disincentive for not barrelling into a guy who you are pissed off at. Also, how do you defend a guy that is going to the basket with a full head of steam and is built like Zion Williams?

 

[paulxu]

That is easy. It is a block.

The ref disagreed with you.

 

[Bona84]

The ref disagreed with you.

Refs have disagreed with me on many an occasion.

 

[jpschmack]

I hate the foul rule and the reset to 0 team fouls at 10 minute mark. You shouldn't get bailed out for having fouled the crap out of the other team first the first 50% of the half, and v.v. Just plain go to quarters at that point. But i like the 1-and-1. Maybe play quarters, 4th and 5th fouls are 1-and-1's, 6th+ are 2 shots.

The only reason they're "resetting fouls" is to retain the number of media timeouts (aka Commercials TV can sell!) of halves while playing quarters.

WBB went to quarters four years ago. It's better.

Free throws are boring. Let’s say you foul once every 90 seconds.

Halves: 14 per half, 28 per game. There’d be 19 minutes of bonus time, 22 to 28 free throws per team.

Same frequency of fouls in quarters format: 10 minutes of bonus time, 16 free throws per team.

Free throws are boring. Action is better.

 

[ace93]

The only reason they're "resetting fouls" is to retain the number of media timeouts (aka Commercials TV can sell!) of halves while playing quarters.

WBB went to quarters four years ago. It's better.

Free throws are boring. Let’s say you foul once every 90 seconds.

Halves: 14 per half, 28 per game. There’d be 19 minutes of bonus time, 22 to 28 free throws per team.

Same frequency of fouls in quarters format: 10 minutes of bonus time, 16 free throws per team.

Free throws are boring. Action is better.

They are not playing quarters, though.

 

[jpschmack]

They are not playing quarters, though.

Right, like I said, the only reason they AREN'T playing quarters is because of the media timeouts. With quarters you have media timeouts at the first whistle under 5 (and first coaches' called timeout after halftime). That's seven media timeouts.

With halves, you have medias at the under 16, 12, 8, 4, plus the first coaches' called of the second. That's nine medias.

Media timeouts are when you sell ads. Ditching two medias in WBB isn't a problem. But that's where ESPN makes their money, so they want halves, not quarters.



"Resetting the fouls" is basically saying "We can't touch the clock because of TV Money, but we're going to set the rules to the quarter format."

 

[ace93]

Right, like I said, the only reason they AREN'T playing quarters is because of the media timeouts. With quarters you have media timeouts at the first whistle under 5 (and first coaches' called timeout after halftime). That's seven media timeouts.

With halves, you have medias at the under 16, 12, 8, 4, plus the first coaches' called of the second. That's nine medias.

Media timeouts are when you sell ads. Ditching two medias in WBB isn't a problem. But that's where ESPN makes their money, so they want halves, not quarters.



"Resetting the fouls" is basically saying "We can't touch the clock because of TV Money, but we're going to set the rules to the quarter format."

Weird. I thought you said they were doing that "while playing quarters". I guess I misunderstood that sentence.