This Week's Trap...

#2
#2
Further, by not putting down a defined line, the powers that be have created a subkective rule that will lead to wildly inconsistent officiating on a night to night basis.

I have this funny suspicion that the rule was put in place at least partly to eliminate the judgement from close calls underneath the basket. My opinion of the quality of officiating in college sports is not very high, but I always find it surprising that rule changes designed to make their jobs easier often don't.

That’s bad news for anyone outside the Commonwealth.

It is bad news for some of us in the Commonwealth as well. For some of us, the dark days of UK basketball glory are still too fresh in the memory.

Good read, hat, thanks:hi:
 
#3
#3
"However, the rules committee managed to botch this perfect idea."

imagine that.

Another good read Hat. :eek:k:
 
#4
#4
No arc under the basket has always been one of my big frustrations with the college game. I'm surprised that they are handling it this way. We can only hope that this is a step toward putting the arc in for 2010-2011.
 
#6
#6
Hat, wasn't the theory behind this change an effort to eliminate the inconsistency in charging calls? Sounds as if it has created a nightmare for officials?
 
#7
#7
BasketvolsFan said:
Hat, wasn't the theory behind this change an effort to eliminate the inconsistency in charging calls? Sounds as if it has created a nightmare for officials?
Click to expand...
That was the theory. However, without the arc, it just creates more confusion.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#9
#9
Oldblood said:
No arc under the basket has always been one of my big frustrations with the college game. I'm surprised that they are handling it this way. We can only hope that this is a step toward putting the arc in for 2010-2011.
Click to expand...

I don't really understand the reasoning behind this. If an offensive player can't run over a defender on the first 88' of court, why should he be allowed to do it in the final 6?

The NBA has a lot of weird rules designed to encourage showtime at the basket. That doesn't mean they are necessary to "improve" the game.
 
#10
#10
cotton said:
I don't really understand the reasoning behind this. If an offensive player can't run over a defender on the first 88' of court, why should he be allowed to do it in the final 6?

The NBA has a lot of weird rules designed to encourage showtime at the basket. That doesn't mean they are necessary to "improve" the game.
Click to expand...
I see it the opposite way. If you don't defend the first 88, you shouldn't be able to bail yourself out by sliding under a guy and putting the onus on an official.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#12
#12
hatvol96 said:
I see it the opposite way. If you don't defend the first 88, you shouldn't be able to bail yourself out by sliding under a guy and putting the onus on an official.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

I think therein lies the problem. Officiating, as a whole, is not at the level it should be. I would prefer that the answer to inconsistent, or just plain lousy, officiating be to hold refs responsible for their job performance, even if being more demanding means higher cost.

Philosophically, I'll stick to my belief that a foul at the top of the key should be a foul at the rim, even though I know it isn't always called that way. I think the problem, though, is with the guy with the whistle, and not the rule.
 
#14
#14
I could care less about Cal now since he's no longer at Memphis especially going to Kentucky. I'd like to see Memphis drill Kentucky to be honest. Cal was one of the better things the city of Memphis had going.
 
#15
#15
utfantilidie said:
I could care less about Cal now since he's no longer at Memphis especially going to Kentucky. I'd like to see Memphis drill Kentucky to be honest. Cal was one of the better things the city of Memphis had going.
Click to expand...

Well I would say Cal was the best thing for the City of Memphis, it sure wasnt King Willie.
 
#16
#16
myrobbins7 said:
Well I would say Cal was the best thing for the City of Memphis, it sure wasnt King Willie.
Click to expand...

Wrong. Charlie Vergos is still king. I know that place is cliche, but I love it anyway.

Note: I'm sure some degenerates would have voted for a certain purple establishment on Mt Moriah, but it is my understanding that it is closed so beer and pork rule.
 
#17
#17
cotton said:
Wrong. Charlie Vergos is still king. I know that place is cliche, but I love it anyway.

Note: I'm sure some degenerates would have voted for a certain purple establishment on Mt Moriah, but it is my understanding that it is closed so beer and pork rule.
Click to expand...

LOL..Well said and yes it is closed.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top