Birth of Basketball

[SupaDave]

January 20, 2009

It was on this day in 1892 that the first official basketball game was played, in Springfield , Massachusetts. Basketball was the brainchild of James Naismith, a Canadian who was teaching at a YMCA training school in Springfield, which prepared young men to go out and be instructors in YMCAs.

Naismith was teaching physical education, but the winters were cold in Massachusetts, and his students were frustrated that they couldn't go outside. He wanted something physically challenging but that could be played indoors, in a relatively small space. He tried all kinds of new and old games, but nothing worked.

Finally he remembered a game he had played as a kid in Canada, a game called Duck on a Rock. He took a few rules from that and adapted it into a game he called Basket Ball. He nailed peach baskets to the balcony on each side of the gym, but the baskets had solid bottoms, so if anyone managed to get the ball in the basket someone else had to climb up and get the ball down.

The rules evolved, and basketball caught on fast, helped by the spread of YMCAs. Naismith helped establish the sport at the college level, becoming head coach at the University of Kansas. By the time he died in 1939, basketball was an official Olympic event.

[airowe]

http://www.parinaznajd.com/_/rsrc/1249751326580/Happy-Birthday-Parinaz-/happy-birthday-basketball-cake.jpg

[Jim3k]

Is it chocolate? And can I have piece, please?

[Turtleboy]

The original rules of basketball. (http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blbasketball_rules.htm)

[pamtar]

That's physically impossible.

[94duke]

The original rules of basketball. (http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blbasketball_rules.htm)

Nice!
Imagine the game of basketball with no dribbling, passing only!
I guess it would be similar to ultimate frisbee in that regard.

[SupaDave]

Nice!
Imagine the game of basketball with no dribbling, passing only!
I guess it would be similar to ultimate frisbee in that regard.

I've thought about this and I think it's more 'soccer with the hands' so to speak.

[94duke]

I've thought about this and I think it's more 'soccer with the hands' so to speak.

I can see that, except that you can dribble in soccer.

[duke4life32182]

That would be interesting to watch.

[CDu]

I can see that, except that you can dribble in soccer.

Yeah, it's kind of half and half. The passing rules of ultimate frisbee with the goal concept of hockey/soccer.

[CDu]

Obviously the game would be much different to watch, as you'd see very few dunks, and you'd lose a lot of the fluidity of the play. But it'd be interesting.

Note the foul rules: no shouldering, holding, pushing, striking or tripping. The game was not meant to be very physical. That's one area in which the game has gotten worse, in my opinion.

I do find the foul rules interesting. If you commit a second foul, hockey-style rules come in to play: your team is essentially in the penalty for an unlimited period until a goal is scored. Something like that would be an interesting way to discourage the physical play and the amount of fouling.

[SupaDave]

I do find the foul rules interesting. If you commit a second foul, hockey-style rules come in to play: your team is essentially in the penalty for an unlimited period until a goal is scored. Something like that would be an interesting way to discourage the physical play and the amount of fouling.

You mean like free throws? Ironically this part appears to be very much intact. Teams have to get into the "bonus" for automatic free throws and fouls during the act of shooting get you one bonafied free throw and a bonus one if you make it.

[CDu]

You mean like free throws? Ironically this part appears to be very much intact. Teams have to get into the "bonus" for automatic free throws and fouls during the act of shooting get you one bonafied free throw and a bonus one if you make it.

Free throws are obviously an attempt at that, but they don't seem to have been a good enough penalty as we've still seen a big increase in the physicality of the game. The penalization policy in the original rulebook seem like a much bigger penalty.

[SupaDave]

Free throws are obviously an attempt at that, but they don't seem to have been a good enough penalty as we've still seen a big increase in the physicality of the game. The penalization policy in the original rulebook seem like a much bigger penalty.

I agree but it seems that once they allowed dribbling that they also decided that human collisions were basically inevitable - to the point where they were incorporated into the game and given names (screen, block, pick...).

[CDu]

I agree but it seems that once they allowed dribbling that they also decided that human collisions were basically inevitable - to the point where they were incorporated into the game and given names (screen, block, pick...).

Yeah, that drastic rule change made the degree of penalty unreasonable at the time. However, I think it would be interesting to move back in that direction. I'm not saying that there should be no contact. I'm saying that excessive contact should be better discouraged.

Maybe a more severe penalty isn't the answer, but much stricter enforcement of the rules is. I'm just intrigued by the concept.

[SupaDave]

Yeah, that drastic rule change made the degree of penalty unreasonable at the time. However, I think it would be interesting to move back in that direction. I'm not saying that there should be no contact. I'm saying that excessive contact should be better discouraged.

Maybe a more severe penalty isn't the answer, but much stricter enforcement of the rules is. I'm just intrigued by the concept.

Let's see - we've still got intentional, flagrant, and technical fouls. So there are a lot of fouls being given out in addition to calling moving screens to avoid blocking fouls and preventing hand checking. A better definition of those would help some. Putting your shoulder down should be a foul no matter what for some folks. Less personals and more intentionals perhaps?