SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,736
|
Post by SFHoya99 on May 7, 2009 17:51:36 GMT -5
Rules are fundamentally arbitrary. The pitcher is trying to get the guy out -- why should he have to throw in a "strike zone"?
|
|
hoyaboy1
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,346
|
Post by hoyaboy1 on May 7, 2009 20:28:54 GMT -5
If you are standing under the basket you aren't playing good defense.
|
|
jgalt
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,380
|
Post by jgalt on May 7, 2009 20:31:17 GMT -5
Someone explain to me the impetus for creating this no-charge zone. I know no one likes Duke-style flopping for whistles, but I also really don't like the NBA's no-defense-allowed-in-this-area arc. Along with the defensive three-second rule and the erstwhile ban on zone defenses, it's this rule that encourages offensive players to careen into the lane with no plan and toss up some junk. Then you get lines that read like 30 pts, 4-14 FG, 18-24 FT: in short, it's the sort of rule that gives the offense too much advantage and leads to the style of play that people who don't watch the NBA hate. What the hell is wrong with guarding the basket? Forcing guys to be able to hit a pull-up jumper is a bad thing? I agree to an extent (i dont think it has as much of am impact as you claim) i think a better way to stop Dukies flopping under neath is to have a flopping/diving rule. It has worked fine in Hockey (even though you can get a diving call and a legitimate call at the same, which i find odd...but i digress). If start calling dives then people will stop diving. |
|
hifigator
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,387
|
Post by hifigator on May 8, 2009 14:59:34 GMT -5
Someone explain to me the impetus for creating this no-charge zone. I know no one likes Duke-style flopping for whistles, but I also really don't like the NBA's no-defense-allowed-in-this-area arc. Along with the defensive three-second rule and the erstwhile ban on zone defenses, it's this rule that encourages offensive players to careen into the lane with no plan and toss up some junk. Then you get lines that read like 30 pts, 4-14 FG, 18-24 FT: in short, it's the sort of rule that gives the offense too much advantage and leads to the style of play that people who don't watch the NBA hate. What the hell is wrong with guarding the basket? Forcing guys to be able to hit a pull-up jumper is a bad thing? I agree to an extent (i dont think it has as much of am impact as you claim) i think a better way to stop Dukies flopping under neath is to have a flopping/diving rule. It has worked fine in Hockey (even though you can get a diving call and a legitimate call at the same, which i find odd...but i digress). If start calling dives then people will stop diving. Didn't college ball tinker with a flopping rule 8 or 10 years ago? |
|
Buckets
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,656
|
Post by Buckets on May 8, 2009 15:28:24 GMT -5
Teams get calls for flopping, but teams also draw legitimate charges under the basket. Like hoyaboy said, if you're standing under the basket you're not playing good defense. So should a help defender be rewarded with a charge call when he rotates over just in time to set up under the basket right before a player takes off for a layup? You can disagree, but I would say no, the rules shouldn't reward this because it's bad defense and it's dangerous. This is just a smaller, undrawn version of the NBA's restricted area. People also like to call the restricted area a "no-defense" zone but you can still play defense if you're the primary defender, you just can't slide over to help. It's a bigger safety issue in the NBA because you're dealing with better athletes, but it's also to not reward guys for bad defense.
|
|
bmartin
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,459
|
Post by bmartin on May 8, 2009 17:20:18 GMT -5
This is not even really a change in the rules as much as new guidance for refs to not call a charge under the rim. Defenders can still block and contest shots and passes from there they just can't bail out their beaten teammate by sliding under the rim for a charge.
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on May 9, 2009 9:17:22 GMT -5
OK, if the refs really keep it to no charges under[\i] the basket, it could be a good change. The worst flops are those where the defender (in blue and white) shifts over directly under the rim and draws contact as the offensive player finishes a layup. Taking that away is a good thing.
When you say "draws contact" do you mean "falls down despite not being touched"? ;D |
|
Buckets
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,656
|
Post by Buckets on Jun 1, 2009 15:40:39 GMT -5
|
|
lichoya68
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
OK YOUNGINS ARE HERE AND ARE VERY VERY GOOD cant wait GO HOYAS
Posts: 17,438
|
Post by lichoya68 on Jun 1, 2009 22:01:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by HoyaSinceBirth on Jun 9, 2009 10:08:57 GMT -5
watching ESPN news today it said that the rule changes have been approved.
One thing that I guess i didn't notice the first time but it said that when a player who is fouled is too injured to shoot then the replacement must be chosen from the players on the court. That's fine, but it also said the opposing team coach gets to choose the player? that seems messed up. So if your player fouls someone so hard htey get injured you get tot put the worst freethrow shooter on ther court to the line.
|
|
hoyasexy
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Actively engaged in extramarital saxa
Posts: 794
|
Post by hoyasexy on Jun 9, 2009 10:31:26 GMT -5
In that case, I hope that they implement the new rule AND start the process (even if it is a 4 year process) for having the line painted on the floor. The line is infinitely better than the rule without the line, but just having the rule itself is an improvement. |
|
Diablo
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 106
|
Post by Diablo on Jun 9, 2009 10:35:27 GMT -5
watching ESPN news today it said that the rule changes have been approved. One thing that I guess i didn't notice the first time but it said that when a player who is fouled is too injured to shoot then the replacement must be chosen from the players on the court. That's fine, but it also said the opposing team coach gets to choose the player? that seems messed up. So if your player fouls someone so hard htey get injured you get tot put the worst freethrow shooter on ther court to the line. think of it the other way. this is to prevent a coach from telling his poor free throw shooter to fake an injury when fouled so the coach can select a good free throw shooter to take the shots instead. otherwise know as pulling a calhoun. |
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079 
|
Post by sleepy on Jun 9, 2009 10:36:56 GMT -5
watching ESPN news today it said that the rule changes have been approved. One thing that I guess i didn't notice the first time but it said that when a player who is fouled is too injured to shoot then the replacement must be chosen from the players on the court. That's fine, but it also said the opposing team coach gets to choose the player? that seems messed up. So if your player fouls someone so hard htey get injured you get tot put the worst freethrow shooter on ther court to the line. Its good and bad. It discourages faking an injury so a good freethrow shooter can take your spot(re:Thabeet). On the negative side if a player is really injured, its a double whammy. I would say the bad part outweighs the good, but its just another reason to hate Uconn. They abused the rule, now its been changed. On the plus side, Georgetown doesn't have any really bad foul shot shooters and we don't have any great ones either, everyones about the same, so this rule probably won't have that great of an effect on us next year. |
|
hoyasexy
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Actively engaged in extramarital saxa
Posts: 794
|
Post by hoyasexy on Jun 9, 2009 10:38:34 GMT -5
watching ESPN news today it said that the rule changes have been approved. One thing that I guess i didn't notice the first time but it said that when a player who is fouled is too injured to shoot then the replacement must be chosen from the players on the court. That's fine, but it also said the opposing team coach gets to choose the player? that seems messed up. So if your player fouls someone so hard htey get injured you get tot put the worst freethrow shooter on ther court to the line. That's why intentional and flagrant fouls are excluded from the rule. |
|
|
|
Post by jkhoya12 on Jun 9, 2009 14:23:26 GMT -5
Excluding intentional and flagrants is a crucial part of this rule change that I didn't realize till now. However, now the onus is on the refs slightly more to distinguish between a flagrant, intentional, or regular foul....
|
|
