new hand checking rule....
- Thread starter alexd
- Start date
- Status
joober jones
Finally Non-Fat Guy
- Joined
- Nov 2, 2011
- Messages
- 4,737
- Reaction Score
- 9,654
It may be cliche, but let 'em play.
The rhyming was not intentional.
The rhyming was not intentional.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 33,763
- Reaction Score
- 97,856
Wow that's ugly........won't be a fun game to watch is this happens!!
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 2,939
- Reaction Score
- 5,752
I may be alone on this, but I wish the NCAA would just leave the game as is, but simple get the refs the properly call the game. I can live with incidental hand checking. It's the grabbing and clutching off the ball and on the ball handler ala Dook and Pitt that should be whistled as a foul is all that needs to be done.
I see a big difference between making any hand contact a foul compared to impeding a player by being overly handsy.
Agree? Disagree?
I see a big difference between making any hand contact a foul compared to impeding a player by being overly handsy.
Agree? Disagree?
GemParty
Co~host of the Sliders & Curveballs Podcast
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 3,421
- Reaction Score
- 6,923
Calhoun was a master at taking more FT than the opposing team. Let's hope Ollie uses our slashers the same way. This season will take some getting used to. Hope we have a great FT shooting team average. Boat/TS need to make those late game one/ones.
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 3,911
- Reaction Score
- 14,249
This Niagara/S Hall game featured 102 FT's.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 4,415
- Reaction Score
- 12,820
Completely disagree.
College basketball has grown increasingly unwatchable over the past several years. While the (enormous) annual turnover has had a lot to do with that, the fact that so many games between ranked teams finished in the 50s and 60s has been turning people away from the game. Even as a diehard college hoops fan, I've found myself watching less and less non-UConn games each year.
The first few weeks are going to be rough to watch, but players adjust to rules faster than you think. For the long term, giving offensive players more freedom of movement will be an overwhelming plus for college bball.
CTBasketball
Former Owner of the Pizza Thread
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2012
- Messages
- 9,870
- Reaction Score
- 32,590
As long as it doesn't end up like the NBA...
zls44
Your #icebus Tour Director
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 9,093
- Reaction Score
- 24,485
Extremely popular and basketball played at the highest level in the world? What a horrible thought, indeed.
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 8,242
- Reaction Score
- 17,505
6 fouls works for the NBA because of the 8 extra minutes.
"Letting them play" was destroying college hoops. Defense was consisting of clutching and grabbing, with a guy standing under the hoop to draw a charge should there be dribble penetration. Obviously they're going over the top in the early season games as that is the only way to affect the in-game behavior.
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 2,939
- Reaction Score
- 5,752
I know I have to give this some time to see how it vets out. I still feel they could clean up the game by calling fouls on the clutching, grabbing and the excessive double hand checking. Coach K had his players to pick up the handler when they cross half court having them get their hands all over them. He banked on the refs not blowing the whistle so far from the basket and lulling them into not calling what turns out to be excessive contact all over the floor as the game goes on.
Pitt used similar, but different strategy. Their players would do some hard hand checking on the handler, but what they would do is bump, clutch and grind the players off the ball who were trying to make their cuts to get open.
I don't know why, but if the refs would simply start blowing the whistle on those sort of activities, teams will stop doing it for obvious reasons. You tend to run out of players that way and get the other team into the bonus and double-bonus.
IMO, if they could get the refs to call that stuff, the game would flow again. If you begin to call the incidental hand checking, you're going to have foul fests almost all the time. For any one who's played the game, it's hard not to touch the handler in some form or fashion. What will happen is many players are going to have to play further off the ball to prevent that, and you're going to see the stronger and better handling wing players driving in the lane at will, or teams playing a lot more zone, which IMO, really f*s up the game. I hope I'm wrong.
Don't get me wrong! I don't like the excessive hand stuff that grinds the game to a halt and results in low scoring games. But on the other hand, I don't like seeing either foul fests, games with predominantly zone defenses deployed, or offenses where players can drive at will with few to no options to slow them down. I'm really concerned that you could end up with a few elite teams that have highly skilled scorers and shooters begin to dominate and separate from the pack. I like good clean hard nose defenses that can slow teams of high flyers when executed properly.
Frankly, I can't stand the NBA regular season where teams light it up on each other and play soft defense. Notice how that changes in the playoffs where teams show they can make stop after stop with tough physical play. For those who think the NBA is free flowing when it counts most, you're greatly mistaken. The playoffs turn into a blood bath of physical play, and it's not just on the called fouls. They also go to the line a lot in the play-offs, which IMO, gets ugly to watch.
So I'll stick to my guns and for now say I don't like the new hand-checking rules and simply wish the NCAA made it more an area of focus for the refs to call fouls on impeding type physical play on both the handler and especially the players off the ball, that often doesn't get called. You'll see calls of this type sometimes when the grabbing or bumping takes place on a screen close to the ball, but if you ever take some time to watch what is happening off the ball (often on the weak-side of the court where the refs sometimes aren't as vigilant) you'll see some teams are coached to bump or even hold on (clutch) the player who is trying to move through traffic to get to his spot. It's a great way to blow up the other teams offensive play. You'll see the handler look to the spot and see the player get there too late, and then has to look for the next read or reset or begin to improvise by driving it themselves. The bump and clutch helps to either keep the man defender close to the cutter, or gives just enough time for teammates to cover up the player till the defender re-engages or the new defender picks up the player who is cutting across the lane and/or through traffic.
Yeah, I'm beating a dead horse, but IMO, this is where the changes in calling the game should take place, but maybe the NCAA has tried to get the refs to call the game this way and seeing that they simply don't each year, have taken more drastic measure where the call simply is more obvious. If you touch the handler, you get called for it. It's just hard to learn to play that way, and even when you do, avoid some hand contact, when the handler drives right at you. This is how the more physical players are going to be able to exploit this. It looked like during certain times in the MD game, their big physical guards did a good job of exploiting this and driving right by our smaller/weaker guards. Now I think our guards could have exploited it similarly by doing the same thing forcing the refs to call the contact, but it looked like our guards were afraid of doing so...maybe afraid of getting stripped. I think Bazz, Boat and a couple other handlers we have should be able to drive it at defenders at angles where they're moving and either create more contact or drive by them more often. I probably need to watch the game again more closely. I do remember MD doing a good job of quickly closing driving lines with weak-side defenders. Again, I didn't watch it as closely as I should have, and I think MD was playing some matchup type zone near the top of the key, preventing our guards from turning the corner on the on-the-ball defender and getting into the paint. At the other end of the floor, they seemed to do a good job, especially early in the clock before our D was set and drive it right at the basket. Makes me wonder if a way to exploit the new rule is to attack early where the weakside D might not be set to close off driving lanes, and maybe that's an area that KO will have their own D work on to stop early penetration. I do get a tad Xs & Os crazy, which probably drives some crazy. It's a sickness.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2012
- Messages
- 1,899
- Reaction Score
- 5,879
With all things equal, including fair officiating, the more you suck the more you foul. So these teams are not that good. The game would have been just as bad on the eyes with the old rules. Now in UConn's case against MD, you can argue that we sucked more since we fouled more. However, the fact that we were up by 17 at one point implies something else was amiss. IMO, the officiating. So in the long run, with proper officiating it is a good rule that will reward better basketball. But...Seton Hall/Niagara game going on right now.
At halftime: 57 total free throws and 40 fouls called.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 13,277
- Reaction Score
- 35,109
People are still stuck thinking this league is putting the Pistons-Spurs 2005 up.
Watch the 2013-14 Spurs, Warriors, Clippers, Rockets, Heat...I mean, they run beautiful offenses, even against great defenses.
i understand the foul/minute ratio is the same, but the effect is definitely different. think about how much foul trouble would affect a 16 minute game if u only got 2, etc
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 2,939
- Reaction Score
- 5,752
Watching today's game and they listed the 4 hand-checking changes, which I hadn't seen before, and they all seem reasonable. They are:
1. A defender can no longer continually keep a hand or forearm on an opponent.
2. A defender can not use an arm bar to impeded an opponent's progress.
3. A defender can can not place 2 hands on an opponent.
4. A defender can not continually jab an opponent by extending an arm or placing a hand or forearm on them.
1 and 3 are things they allowed before, but IMO are both reasonable to call and for the players to learn not to do.
2 seems like something they should have been calling all along with the old rules.
4 is something that sometimes was called, but where it will now be real tough to try not to do is when players try to back their way down into the post. It was common for defenders to fend off the offensive player with the forearm. Now they are going to have to do it more with their lower body, which gives a huge advantage to the bigger and stronger players. I wonder if we'll begin to see a lot more weakside help come down to force the bigs to pick up their dribble and not be able to back their way so easily to the hoop.
Anyhow, I'm okay with them calling it this way. I had thought that incidental one handed hand checks would be called, but it's more continuous and impeding type hand-checking and two handed hand-checking that they're calling.
1. A defender can no longer continually keep a hand or forearm on an opponent.
2. A defender can not use an arm bar to impeded an opponent's progress.
3. A defender can can not place 2 hands on an opponent.
4. A defender can not continually jab an opponent by extending an arm or placing a hand or forearm on them.
1 and 3 are things they allowed before, but IMO are both reasonable to call and for the players to learn not to do.
2 seems like something they should have been calling all along with the old rules.
4 is something that sometimes was called, but where it will now be real tough to try not to do is when players try to back their way down into the post. It was common for defenders to fend off the offensive player with the forearm. Now they are going to have to do it more with their lower body, which gives a huge advantage to the bigger and stronger players. I wonder if we'll begin to see a lot more weakside help come down to force the bigs to pick up their dribble and not be able to back their way so easily to the hoop.
Anyhow, I'm okay with them calling it this way. I had thought that incidental one handed hand checks would be called, but it's more continuous and impeding type hand-checking and two handed hand-checking that they're calling.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 10,222
- Reaction Score
- 32,989
I was for the rule changes, and I still am, but some of these foul calls are absurd and in some cases make defense all but impossible. Maybe as time goes on the refs will let more stuff go, but if their goal was to mirror the NBA game in terms of flow and whats allowed they're failing, NBA refs don't call every single touching glance of an opponent.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 9,324
- Reaction Score
- 33,970
It is going to be hard to define what is and isn't a foul under the new rules. I think we are going to see some very disturbing games called. The home cooking we'll see for Duke, UK and some others is going to be nuts. You can call a foul at any given second of the game under these rules because someone is always committing a foul. Which ones do you call?
- Status