Question for basketball fans (rule change)

#1

Ohio Vol

Inquisitor of Offense
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
3,057
Likes
128
#1
I've watched a decent amount of the conference tournaments and basically got my yearly reminder of why I can't stand the last two minutes of most games. If a team is down by 1 or 2 and the shot clock for the opposition exceeds the game clock, I can see the necessity of the "foul, put them on the line, and we'll get the ball back". What I don't see the necessity of is a team that's down by 10, 15, or 20 points doing exactly the same thing on the same basis. I think the largest deficit I've ever seen overcome in the fouling situation is 5 or 6.

So what would the more passionate basketball fans think of something like this: since 7 fouls is a one-and-one and 10 fouls is a double bonus, why not have a third level? If a team has, say, 13 or 14 fouls in a half, why not treat it the rest the same as an intentional foul or a technical? The fouled team shoots the free throws and then gets possession as well.

I think this would ensure that a team that's played a close game would be able to employ the strategy, but it would also ensure that a team that's down by a ton won't be able to turn the last 2:00 into a 30- or 45-minute ordeal of fouling, free throws, missed three-pointers, and more fouling.
 
#2
#2
Only problem, if I understood that correctly, is if a team is down 1-3 pts with <35s and has to foul. If they're over the limit, they have no chance to win unless they get a steal. It would take away a lot of possible exciting finishes.
 
#3
#3
Only problem, if I understood that correctly, is if a team is down 1-3 pts with <35s and has to foul. If they're over the limit, they have no chance to win unless they get a steal. It would take away a lot of possible exciting finishes.

I think we'd have to actually have a study done to truly see the following.

- How many teams end up with 13 fouls in the second half?
- How many teams end up with 14 fouls in the second half?
- How many have 13/14 fouls with 2:00 to go?
- How many have 13/14 fouls with 1:00 to go?
- How many teams end up with 13/14 fouls who had fewer than 10 at 2:00?
- What was the deficit when the "keep on fouling" strategy was employed?

I think most basketball rule adjustments tend to focus around the idea of "quit screwing around and play basketball already". I'd venture to guess that the overwhelming majority of times that a team ends up with 13 or 14 fouls in a half comes directly from the use of this strategy.

If such a study were to be conducted, what would the acceptable threshold be? If 50% of times that a team has that many fouls is either one where the strategy isn't employed or only in the last 35 seconds, I'd argue that it would in fact serve to cut down on exciting finishes. But if it's 80, 85, or 90% where that many fouls is a direct result of the strategy, would it be agreed that the rule change might be worth exploring?
 
#4
#4
I think this would change the strategy for the rest of the game as well. It would likely be a different pace with a focus on getting fouled. This would usually favor the home team and would make road upsets even harder to pull off. I don't like it.

If you think people complain about the refs deciding games right now, then just wait until they have your team by the short hairs and they can't foul any more in a game that hasn't been called evenly. Vanderbilt would be undefeated. I like the way things are now.

If I were to make any change like this, I would consider the margin separating the teams. If the fouling team is down by more than 10 points and fouls more than say three times in a minute, hit them with a technical for delay of game or something similar. I think it should be the same for close games as it is now.
 
#5
#5
I think this would change the strategy for the rest of the game as well. It would likely be a different pace with a focus on getting fouled. This would usually favor the home team and would make road upsets even harder to pull off. I don't like it.

If you think people complain about the refs deciding games right now, then just wait until they have your team by the short hairs and they can't foul any more in a game that hasn't been called evenly. Vanderbilt would be undefeated. I like the way things are now.

If I were to make any change like this, I would consider the margin separating the teams. If the fouling team is down by more than 10 points and fouls more than say three times in a minute, hit them with a technical for delay of game or something similar. I think it should be the same for close games as it is now.

What if it were something more like this:

If the "triple bonus", as I'll refer to it (two shots + possession), threshold has been hit, only fouls that take place while that team is actually contesting a shot wouldn't count.

So let's say Team A is down by four, has 16 fouls, and there's two minutes left. If a foul is committed against a Team B player who is actually driving to the basket or shooting, it's two free throws. If it's outside the context of offensive production (let's define it as "a foul outside the three-point arc"), it's two free throws and possession.

This would allow the team with a ton of fouls to still be able to contest shots and force their opponent to also still play some basketball rather than passing around for 35 seconds and turning the ball over.
 
#6
#6
I don't like the BS fouling thing, but KU gas a title now and Memphis is still without because KU overcame a 14 point hole by doing it.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#7
#7
My recommendation - over ten fouls then the fouled team gets an uncontested throw-in into back court from mid court and uncontested advancement into front court. Defense can't cross mid court. This essentially penalizes the fouling team up to ten seconds off the clock for "excessive fouling".
 

VN Store



Back
Top