PDA

View Full Version : How do you all feel about the "Freedom of Movement Rules" no longer in effect?



smvalkyries
12-14-2015, 03:58 PM
The announcers keep raving about the improvement to the game`- personally I don't like the addition of 10 FT's a game and the constant stream of penetrators vs rim protectors that seems to ensue. I absolutely abhor seeing premier perimeter defenders like Matt Jones trying to stay in front of his man with his hands plastered to the outside of his knees. Can any perimeter defender can stay in front of an offensive penetrator anymore?. I don't think the rules committee intended to reduce the defender's man up perpendicular defensible area from 6 and 1/2 feet to 30 inches ( hands down defensive position vs handless defensive position). I am 67 years old and if you give me that extra 4 feet I think I can still drive by quality ACC perimeter defenders. To me this just equalizes good and bad perimeter defenders as neither can prevent penetration, puts much more emphasis on having at least 2 good rim protectors and will ultimately lead to much more zone play and the demise of pressure man defense ?
Do any of you think that with a few years practice the defense can catch up to the offense and be able to prevent penetration with handless defense? I don't, we used to practice defense with our hands behind our back, while its true defense starts with the feet it can't start and end there when trying to stop someone that can use their hands as well as their feet against you.
Anyway that's my rant- this year our Duke team is better suited to adapt more than in the past. Unless the refs ease up in conference play we will have to recruit a lot more rim protectors in the future and sadly put much less emphasis on wing defense. It latrogenic I say, harming a great product in an attempt to fix something that wasn't broken. If the rules committee wants to play soccer defense at least let the defenders kick the ball. LOL Maybe we should bring Wojo's foot thing back. Remember when he used to make ball handlers fall down by either putting his feet on their feet or wedging their feet from the front? If hands aren't allowed maybe the use of feet has been expanded?

CDu
12-14-2015, 04:47 PM
I like it. I wasn't a fan of all the uncalled fouling allowed.

Not thrilled by the extra fouls, but that is a necessary byproduct until teams and players adjust.

vick
12-14-2015, 07:33 PM
For what it's worth, the average ratio of free throw attempts to field goal attempts is actually down slightly this year, from 37.0% to 36.5%, although I don't know if this ratio changes during the year as teams play more competitive games. At any rate, I think whatever impact we've seen so far is marginal not transformative, although I like what I see.

jipops
12-14-2015, 09:48 PM
If teams and players eventually "adjust", then fine. But so far, I hate it. To me it hasn't done anything to improve the quality of the game. Maybe it eventually will, maybe not. Sure the scoring has been up, but some of that is also due to the shot clock and increase of possessions. But bigger scores doesn't necessarily equate to improved play. I just hear more whistles. My one issue with the nba is the ridiculous foul call as a result of the defender just breathing too hard on the star player on the drive. Now we've gone there in college ball.

I would have been fine with the 30 second shot clock being the only change. In my opinion these "freedom of movement" changes were completely unnecessary.

-jk
12-14-2015, 09:57 PM
I love the idea of freedom of movement. The track record in trying to free the game up has been pretty miserable the last few years, though.

The NCAA makes it a point of emphasis or some such. Refs call fouls. Fans and tv blowhards complain how the refs are ruining the game before conference play starts. Then as conference play cranks up, the refs let it go again. If they could stick with it for a season - let everyone know they mean business - we might get there.

Anyway, I still miss flowy hoops.

-jk

elvis14
12-14-2015, 10:34 PM
I love the idea of freedom of movement. The track record in trying to free the game up has been pretty miserable the last few years, though.

The NCAA makes it a point of emphasis or some such. Refs call fouls. Fans and tv blowhards complain how the refs are ruining the game before conference play starts. Then as conference play cranks up, the refs let it go again. If they could stick with it for a season - let everyone know they mean business - we might get there.

Anyway, I still miss flowy hoops.

-jk

JK has articulated my thoughts very well. I want movement and flow and I'm willing to accept the extra foul calls to get it. But history tells us that this is just an early season exercise for the refs.

Kfanarmy
12-15-2015, 01:12 AM
I watched the Michigan State -Florida game the other day...it's clear some officials haven't got the word...they didn't seem to mind holding, wrestling and tripping in that one.

Heaven's Guardian
12-15-2015, 01:38 AM
They call way too much on the ball now. The big problem was and is with off-ball movement, where you couldn't run any plays because of all the clutching and grabbing. They call that a bit more, but most of the new calls are on-ball, which was already called far too tightly. We might end up like the NBA soon in college, where pick-and-roll is the only viable offensive play because you aren't allowed to defend it, either on the ball (no hand checking) or on help defense (refs call far, far too few offensive fouls because they don't understand that defenders don't have to be static).

DarkstarWahoo
12-15-2015, 10:21 AM
Which probably makes it pretty obvious that I don't like the FOM rules. After all, it's my ox being explicitly gored here.

There's got to be a middle ground between "clutch and grab" and "free drive to the basket." A defender who beats his opponent to the spot should have as much right to be there as the offensive player does. Staying in front of someone is fundamental defense, not "restricting movement."

Similarly, fighting for post position is part of the game. It throws the entire game out of balance when the offensive player is allowed to battle for position and the defensive player isn't.

In theory, cutting down on hand checking is great. In practice, it's the college hoops equivalent of the Manning Rules. It broke my heart earlier this year when Malcolm Brogdon - as proud a defensive player as you will find in the college game - stopped defending and just let a Bradley player go by for a layup. But that's what the rules dictate.

Jeffrey
12-15-2015, 10:27 AM
It's pretty clear who I'm a fan of....


Yep, the best band in the history of music!

Henderson
12-15-2015, 10:29 AM
I love the idea of freedom of movement.

Interesting. Freedom of movement has always been an aspiration. Freedom of movement is one of the fundamental freedoms of the EU, dating back to the original Treaty of Rome. Interesting that it's being challenged both in sports and in politics right now.

But we aren't doing politics here. My point is just that it's an enduring aspiration. Teams moving (hello Al Davis), players moving between teams (think Curt Flood), refugees in Europe. You think it's not connected, and suddenly there's Alex Murphy or Silent G.

It may be tough to see the connection to "freedom of movement" inside basketball rules, but it's there.

CDu
12-15-2015, 10:31 AM
There's got to be a middle ground between "clutch and grab" and "free drive to the basket." A defender who beats his opponent to the spot should have as much right to be there as the offensive player does. Staying in front of someone is fundamental defense, not "restricting movement."

This is an irrelevant point, as what you describe here is still very much legal. You just aren't allowed to foul a guy in order to beat him to the spot.


Similarly, fighting for post position is part of the game. It throws the entire game out of balance when the offensive player is allowed to battle for position and the defensive player isn't.

Also an irrelevant argument as it is still legal to battle for post position defensively. What you aren't allowed to do is use your hands or forearms to defend a player posting up. You can still use your body (which is all the offensive player is doing in that case too).


In theory, cutting down on hand checking is great. In practice, it's the college hoops equivalent of the Manning Rules. It broke my heart earlier this year when Malcolm Brogdon - as proud a defensive player as you will find in the college game - stopped defending and just let a Bradley player go by for a layup. But that's what the rules dictate.

No, it's not what the rules dictate. The rules dictate that, instead of using your hands/forearms to play defense, you actually use your feet. Nothing in the rules prevent a team from playing good defense. You just have to work harder to do it. Previously, teams were getting away with cheating defensively by grabbing/holding/forearming/hip-checking/shouldering offensive players to make up for not moving their feet.

DarkstarWahoo
12-15-2015, 11:04 AM
This is an irrelevant point, as what you describe here is still very much legal. You just aren't allowed to foul a guy in order to beat him to the spot.

Also an irrelevant argument as it is still legal to battle for post position defensively. What you aren't allowed to do is use your hands or forearms to defend a player posting up. You can still use your body (which is all the offensive player is doing in that case too).

No, it's not what the rules dictate. The rules dictate that, instead of using your hands/forearms to play defense, you actually use your feet. Nothing in the rules prevent a team from playing good defense. You just have to work harder to do it. Previously, teams were getting away with cheating defensively by grabbing/holding/forearming/hip-checking/shouldering offensive players to make up for not moving their feet.

That's not how it's being called, particularly in the first case. I've watched nearly every minute of UVA hoops this year, and they give up multiple cheap fouls a game on the perimeter when they're just defending a spot. I do think that refs have been watching UVA more closely because the rule was plainly targeted at them. It has gotten better in recent games, and I imagine that part of that is adjustments on UVA's part and part of it is refs feeling less of a need to over-emphasize the new rules.

I'm not a "complain about the refs" type. I can admit when my teams foul, and even when I disagree with calls, I generally understand why they were made (particularly when it's Mike Tobey pulling his "Who, me?" routine in the post). But guys like Thompson and Perrantes are getting cheap fouls every game for doing nothing more than staying in front of guys late in the shot clock. That's garbage.

CDu
12-15-2015, 11:13 AM
That's not how it's being called, particularly in the first case. I've watched nearly every minute of UVA hoops this year, and they give up multiple cheap fouls a game on the perimeter when they're just defending a spot. I do think that refs have been watching UVA more closely because the rule was plainly targeted at them. It has gotten better in recent games, and I imagine that part of that is adjustments on UVA's part and part of it is refs feeling less of a need to over-emphasize the new rules.

I'm not a "complain about the refs" type. I can admit when my teams foul, and even when I disagree with calls, I generally understand why they were made (particularly when it's Mike Tobey pulling his "Who, me?" routine in the post). But guys like Thompson and Perrantes are getting cheap fouls every game for doing nothing more than staying in front of guys late in the shot clock. That's garbage.

I suspect you either have a different interpretation of "staying in front of guys" than the rules actually imply. Or a colored view of what actually happened. My guess is the latter, although I will concede that officials do miss calls, and you may be simply remembering specific instances where an official blew a call and applying that more broadly than is generally occurring.

In general, what you describe is not happening. It may be occasionally being miscalled, but that's not broadly the case. What IS being called are the supposedly ticky-tack hand-checks and such that ARE fouls but previously weren't being called. They are also calling fouls when a player uses his body but hasn't actually beaten his man to the spot. Specifically, when you side-check a guy as he's driving. UVa does a lot of that, and that is a foul, because you actually have to beat the man to the spot to be in legal guarding position. Bumping the driver at an angle is not legal guarding position, nor is it staying in front of your man.

Duke and UVa both have long history of taking advantage of physicality on defense (hand-checking, forearming, grabbing, etc). I've not noticed Duke having much trouble with the new rules. And in fact I've appreciated them greatly, as I've never liked that style of defense.

oldnavy
12-15-2015, 11:32 AM
I like it. I wasn't a fan of all the uncalled fouling allowed.

Not thrilled by the extra fouls, but that is a necessary byproduct until teams and players adjust.

But will the players adjust? I am skeptical that the players will change how they play the game. I can see the kids getting more fouls called and the additional FT's, but I don't think that the enforcement of these "new" rules are going to radically change the way the game is played by the kids.

I am also skeptical that coaches will "coach" to the standards that are being enforced during games, because I don't get the sense that the coaches know or even approve of how the games are being called now.

I do think we will see more of the starters sitting for longer periods of time with foul trouble, but we are talking about changing YEARS and YEARS of ingrained behavior on the fly by enforcement DURING the games. I just don't see it happening like that.

I also think that BB is going to lose viewers because it is NOT a good product as it is now. The increase of freshmen dominated teams, along with the incessant stoppage of play leaves a lot to be desired. I can hardly watch a full game anymore before I lose interest... I cannot imagine the "Twitter" generation being attracted to such a product.

I may only speak for myself, but I can tell you I am nowhere near as interested in BB as I once was, and I think it is because the game has no flow, and drags on and on... so anything that increases play stoppage is going to drive me further away. I am not patient enough to wait for the game to change because I liked the way it was played in the past.

Do I sound really old or what?

CDu
12-15-2015, 11:47 AM
But will the players adjust? I am skeptical that the players will change how they play the game. I can see the kids getting more fouls called and the additional FT's, but I don't think that the enforcement of these "new" rules are going to radically change the way the game is played by the kids.

We seem to have adjusted nicely.


I am also skeptical that coaches will "coach" to the standards that are being enforced during games, because I don't get the sense that the coaches know or even approve of how the games are being called now.

And herein lies the issue. Many coaches that have coached an overly-physical approach to defense will continue to do so and hope that the officials fold (as they have always done in the past).

But I think Coach K's approach (and the lack of excessive foul calls we've incurred) is evidence that you CAN succeed in coaching a different way. Just not all coaches are willing to do it. I suspect because not all coaches approve of the changes (as you say).


I do think we will see more of the starters sitting for longer periods of time with foul trouble, but we are talking about changing YEARS and YEARS of ingrained behavior on the fly by enforcement DURING the games. I just don't see it happening like that.

Well, nobody said it would be a quick and painless process. The point isn't to quickly fix the problem. The point is to try to fix the problem. And there was/is a problem that needs to be fixed. If it takes time, so be it.


I also think that BB is going to lose viewers because it is NOT a good product as it is now. The increase of freshmen dominated teams, along with the incessant stoppage of play leaves a lot to be desired. I can hardly watch a full game anymore before I lose interest... I cannot imagine the "Twitter" generation being attracted to such a product.

I may only speak for myself, but I can tell you I am nowhere near as interested in BB as I once was, and I think it is because the game has no flow, and drags on and on... so anything that increases play stoppage is going to drive me further away. I am not patient enough to wait for the game to change because I liked the way it was played in the past.

Do I sound really old or what?

First, I don't know that we're really seeing excessive stoppages. Maybe we are, but I think somebody posted data suggesting that the free throw rate isn't actually all that different.

Beyond that though, I personally found the quality of the game the last few years to already be at a low. The amount of uncalled physicality resulted in an asthetically awful brand of basketball. Watching 50-47 games with shooting percentages in the 30s and tons and tons of uncalled fouls was awful. Yes, watching a parade of trips to the foul line is also awful. But the point is that, hopefully, teams will adjust. And the end result will be the way basketball was meant to be played.

Basketball is not, by nature, a contact sport. It has become a contact sport thanks to teams over the last 2.5 decades playing bruising-enough play that the officials got desensitized to the fouls. They are trying to fix it. It will likely take time, as the bully-ball coaches of the world will have to be convinced that the rules are indeed going to continue to be enforced.

But some coaches do appear to have adapted. So there is hope.

oldnavy
12-15-2015, 12:25 PM
We seem to have adjusted nicely.



And herein lies the issue. Many coaches that have coached an overly-physical approach to defense will continue to do so and hope that the officials fold (as they have always done in the past).

But I think Coach K's approach (and the lack of excessive foul calls we've incurred) is evidence that you CAN succeed in coaching a different way. Just not all coaches are willing to do it. I suspect because not all coaches approve of the changes (as you say).



Well, nobody said it would be a quick and painless process. The point isn't to quickly fix the problem. The point is to try to fix the problem. And there was/is a problem that needs to be fixed. If it takes time, so be it.



First, I don't know that we're really seeing excessive stoppages. Maybe we are, but I think somebody posted data suggesting that the free throw rate isn't actually all that different.

Beyond that though, I personally found the quality of the game the last few years to already be at a low. The amount of uncalled physicality resulted in an asthetically awful brand of basketball. Watching 50-47 games with shooting percentages in the 30s and tons and tons of uncalled fouls was awful. Yes, watching a parade of trips to the foul line is also awful. But the point is that, hopefully, teams will adjust. And the end result will be the way basketball was meant to be played.

Basketball is not, by nature, a contact sport. It has become a contact sport thanks to teams over the last 2.5 decades playing bruising-enough play that the officials got desensitized to the fouls. They are trying to fix it. It will likely take time, as the bully-ball coaches of the world will have to be convinced that the rules are indeed going to continue to be enforced.

But some coaches do appear to have adapted. So there is hope.

Maybe it wouldn't be so bad if the officials would actually only call the fouls that happen. In almost every game there is at least a couple of "phantom" fouls called where on replay there is little to zero contact made. These drive me crazy. If the officials would wait until they actually see the foul to call the foul it might not be so bad... but they seem to anticipate the fouls and call them before the play unfolds. I have never understood this. I believe the "rule" should be that you have to be certain you see what you call. I would rather them miss a call than to make a call that doesn't happen. AND FLOPPING, DON'T GET ME STARTED ON THE FLOPS!!

Hey, the issue isn't confined to NCAA Men's BB, then NFL is having a bit of an officiating "crisis" as well.... I have been griping about the quality of officiating for years and years, and I thought it was just me being and old man, but now it seems that more and more folks are seeing the decline of good officiated games.

It's time for my nap...

CDu
12-15-2015, 12:35 PM
Maybe it wouldn't be so bad if the officials would actually only call the fouls that happen. In almost every game there is at least a couple of "phantom" fouls called where on replay there is little to zero contact made. These drive me crazy. If the officials would wait until they actually see the foul to call the foul it might not be so bad... but they seem to anticipate the fouls and call them before the play unfolds. I have never understood this. I believe the "rule" should be that you have to be certain you see what you call. I would rather them miss a call than to make a call that doesn't happen. AND FLOPPING, DON'T GET ME STARTED ON THE FLOPS!!

Hey, the issue isn't confined to NCAA Men's BB, then NFL is having a bit of an officiating "crisis" as well... I have been griping about the quality of officiating for years and years, and I thought it was just me being and old man, but now it seems that more and more folks are seeing the decline of good officiated games.

It's time for my nap...

No, I totally agree with you that officiating stinks. In addition to the freedom of movement stuff, there needs to be a general emphasis on better officiating. And as you said, that's true outside of basketball too. Basically, outside of sports where there are very few rules (rugby, hockey, soccer), the officiating has generally become horrific. And even in soccer, the officiating can be bad at key times.

The problem is that, with more and more rules, it's harder and harder to officiate on the fly. But with fewer and fewer rules, the game tends to be more and more physical (like rugby and hockey).

Somehow the NBA, NFL, and college bball need to do a better job of getting better officiating. On that, I completely agree with you. Of course, that could just be that I'm catching up to you in old man-ness. :)

Indoor66
12-15-2015, 12:42 PM
No, I totally agree with you that officiating stinks. In addition to the freedom of movement stuff, there needs to be a general emphasis on better officiating. And as you said, that's true outside of basketball too. Basically, outside of sports where there are very few rules (rugby, hockey, soccer), the officiating has generally become horrific. And even in soccer, the officiating can be bad at key times.

The problem is that, with more and more rules, it's harder and harder to officiate on the fly. But with fewer and fewer rules, the game tends to be more and more physical (like rugby and hockey).

Somehow the NBA, NFL, and college bball need to do a better job of getting better officiating. On that, I completely agree with you. Of course, that could just be that I'm catching up to you in old man-ness. :)

It is very difficult to find precision in an imprecise activity. Officiating demands judgement calls on the fly that are then excruciatingly examined by slow-motion cameras and multi angles. It will always be complained about. That is why I favor doing away with replay and acceptance of the golf concept of the "rub of the green." Much agonizing would be avoided - though the frustration would remain. :cool:

ChillinDuke
12-15-2015, 01:35 PM
There are many different and interconnected beliefs at play in this thread (and generally on this topic).

One that is baffling to me is the belief that "coaches and/or players won't adjust" to new rules. How does that make any sense? New rules/restrictions aren't a foreign concept to anyone. They are instituted at work, by your husband/wife, by school, by the government, you name it. People (by and large) don't just shirk them because they're new and/or they disagree with them. Especially, in the context of sport which is defined by competition and a desire to win. Clearly it's harder to win a game if you aren't being efficient at following the rules - at least that seems to make logical sense to me.

So, of course coaches and/or players will adjust. To not adjust is to become irrelevant, and I doubt there are many coaches/players that will be so stubborn as to descend down this route.

It's going to take some time to adjust. How much time? That's unclear. My $0.02 is that coaches/players will adjust quickly. They wouldn't be as good at this sport as they presumably are if they couldn't master some quick adaptations. Pundits/talking heads/people talk about "making in-game adjustments." "It's all about making adjustments." Well, if such a concept is truly doable while in a game, why wouldn't these adjustments be possible within a season. Of course, there will be a spectrum here, and some will adjust faster than others. But I can't reasonably imagine a scenario where the adjustments to these new rules takes, say, years. Frankly, I'd be surprised if it takes months. But of course I could be wrong.

To finish off my thought/rant, I think all parties involved will adjust to the new rules. To what extent this improves the quality/watchability of the college game is a slightly different (while interconnected) question. I, for one, am willing to give this some time to play out and see what product and byproduct(s) result. My hope is that I won't have to wait until 2018 to start seeing those results.

- Chillin

smvalkyries
12-15-2015, 02:14 PM
As usual I enjoy the diversity of comments here. Wahoo you weren't targeted we play (or used to play) as physical a defense as you do; albeit maybe not quite as well as you do the last couple of years. I am surprised that no one seems to care that it is virtually impossible to defend the perimeter drive anymore. I like defense, I like good hard defense. Rim protection is probably much more exciting but defense used to start with stopping penetration- no more. I guess I wouldn't mnind so much if I thought that in 2-3 years the players skills would improve so much that perimeter defenders could stop penetration in a no hands manner but I don't see it happening. The 4 foot difference is enormous. I wonder if the majority of those commenting actually played the game and/or have any experience trying to defend no hands style? Long term I don't think you will see a speed up in play, players and coaches do adjust- they just switch to zone (which does slow down the game) and teach their players to defend with their hands on their knees.(Might as well release for the fast break?) What you won't see anymore is perimeter defense. I might also suggest that Duke fans might not like the FMR rules so much if Jefferson is out for an extended period of time as perimeter man-to-man defense used to be a lynchpin of K's defense and under FMR the second rim protector or lack thereof now is the critical piece for a team to even attempt playing man to man. I make no excuse for being an old purist- If it ain't broke don't try to fix it! Please put defensive skill back in the game !!

elvis14
12-15-2015, 02:41 PM
If it ain't broke don't try to fix it! Please put defensive skill back in the game !!

I'm all for good defense but it was broken and they are trying to fix it. There's a difference between rewarding good defense and allowing too much contact to kill the flow of the game. If having more dribble penetration allowed is necessary to clean up what's been a wrestling match in the paint for more than 5 years, so be it. If a player can actually prevent dribble penetration under these new rules they are indeed a great defender and will be rewarded. If anything, these change will put defensive skill back in the game. How much defensive skill does it really take to push, grab, hold, bump etc? Less than it takes to play clean defense in a game that flows. Players with real defensive skill will be more noticeable because there won't be all those defender wanna be's grinding their way through a game looking like they are playing "good" defense.

oldnavy
12-15-2015, 03:27 PM
There are many different and interconnected beliefs at play in this thread (and generally on this topic).

One that is baffling to me is the belief that "coaches and/or players won't adjust" to new rules. How does that make any sense? New rules/restrictions aren't a foreign concept to anyone. They are instituted at work, by your husband/wife, by school, by the government, you name it. People (by and large) don't just shirk them because they're new and/or they disagree with them. Especially, in the context of sport which is defined by competition and a desire to win. Clearly it's harder to win a game if you aren't being efficient at following the rules - at least that seems to make logical sense to me.

So, of course coaches and/or players will adjust. To not adjust is to become irrelevant, and I doubt there are many coaches/players that will be so stubborn as to descend down this route.

It's going to take some time to adjust. How much time? That's unclear. My $0.02 is that coaches/players will adjust quickly. They wouldn't be as good at this sport as they presumably are if they couldn't master some quick adaptations. Pundits/talking heads/people talk about "making in-game adjustments." "It's all about making adjustments." Well, if such a concept is truly doable while in a game, why wouldn't these adjustments be possible within a season. Of course, there will be a spectrum here, and some will adjust faster than others. But I can't reasonably imagine a scenario where the adjustments to these new rules takes, say, years. Frankly, I'd be surprised if it takes months. But of course I could be wrong.

To finish off my thought/rant, I think all parties involved will adjust to the new rules. To what extent this improves the quality/watchability of the college game is a slightly different (while interconnected) question. I, for one, am willing to give this some time to play out and see what product and byproduct(s) result. My hope is that I won't have to wait until 2018 to start seeing those results.

- Chillin

I think you are talking to me... which is fine. I am skeptical that the changes will happen, because.... well we've been down this road before. By mid season, the refs will back off the enforcement of the "rules of emphasis" and things go back to where they were because coaches, fans and commentators will tire of the choppy, long games. To "fix" the issue will take a couple of years of consistent (key word) enforcement. Heck, we can't get the refs to be "consistent" within a single game a lot of the time. Fouls not called early get called late, you've seen it...

Of course things can change... but I just don't think they will unless the NCAA is VERY committed to making the change. I don't have a lot of faith that the NCAA will hold the course, because they have done this many, many times before without much impact.

CDu
12-15-2015, 03:43 PM
I think you are talking to me... which is fine. I am skeptical that the changes will happen, because... well we've been down this road before. By mid season, the refs will back off the enforcement of the "rules of emphasis" and things go back to where they were because coaches, fans and commentators will tire of the choppy, long games. To "fix" the issue will take a couple of years of consistent (key word) enforcement. Heck, we can't get the refs to be "consistent" within a single game a lot of the time. Fouls not called early get called late, you've seen it...

Of course things can change... but I just don't think they will unless the NCAA is VERY committed to making the change. I don't have a lot of faith that the NCAA will hold the course, because they have done this many, many times before without much impact.

Yeah, the crux of it is that the NCAA/officials have to stick to their guns, which hasn't happened previously. So those coaches that refuse to adapt are essentially just calling the officials' bluff. They'll wait it out, thinking that come tourney time things will go right back to business as usual.

It's as simple as this: if a team loses in their conference tourney and the NCAA tourney because they incorrectly called the officials' bluff and hand-checked away their season, THEN you'll see true reform among the coaches. You have to hit them where it counts, and that is at championship time. So college bball has to stick to their guns not just through December, but all the way through the NCAA tournament. If they do so, you can be darn sure that any stragglers will adapt by next year.

ChillinDuke
12-15-2015, 04:43 PM
I think you are talking to me... which is fine. I am skeptical that the changes will happen, because... well we've been down this road before. By mid season, the refs will back off the enforcement of the "rules of emphasis" and things go back to where they were because coaches, fans and commentators will tire of the choppy, long games. To "fix" the issue will take a couple of years of consistent (key word) enforcement. Heck, we can't get the refs to be "consistent" within a single game a lot of the time. Fouls not called early get called late, you've seen it...

Of course things can change... but I just don't think they will unless the NCAA is VERY committed to making the change. I don't have a lot of faith that the NCAA will hold the course, because they have done this many, many times before without much impact.

Many posters have brought up this concept over the years (because, as you said, we've been down this road before) - so I wasn't intending to direct personally to you. I agree it will take consistent enforcement, but I'm not sure it will take years.


Yeah, the crux of it is that the NCAA/officials have to stick to their guns, which hasn't happened previously. So those coaches that refuse to adapt are essentially just calling the officials' bluff. They'll wait it out, thinking that come tourney time things will go right back to business as usual.

It's as simple as this: if a team loses in their conference tourney and the NCAA tourney because they incorrectly called the officials' bluff and hand-checked away their season, THEN you'll see true reform among the coaches. You have to hit them where it counts, and that is at championship time. So college bball has to stick to their guns not just through December, but all the way through the NCAA tournament. If they do so, you can be darn sure that any stragglers will adapt by next year.

I think this is right. Once a coach and/or player recognizes that it ain't working, they'll change. Or attempt to change. Because it's basketball - and none of these people wants to lose.

- Chillin

Troublemaker
01-08-2016, 07:10 PM
The NCAA weighs in at the halfway point of the regular season (http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/25441139/new-rules-have-improved-college-hoops----but-theres-still-one-huge-concern)

Some interesting opinions in there.

TL;DR version - The numbers look good, but the impact hasn't been as drastic as the '13-'14 season. Dave Gavitt would like to see even more fouls called. The NCAA's goal is to not allow regression during conference play.

Personally, I really like the way '15-'16 has been called so far. If the impact doesn't match '13-'14, it's because the coaches and players had the experience of '13'-'14 to learn how to adjust quicker. If the refs all of a sudden start to call things even tighter, that feels like it will be going overboard to me. I do want to see even less physical play in the post, though.

devildeac
01-08-2016, 07:48 PM
That's not how it's being called, particularly in the first case. I've watched nearly every minute of UVA hoops this year, and they give up multiple cheap fouls a game on the perimeter when they're just defending a spot. I do think that refs have been watching UVA more closely because the rule was plainly targeted at them. It has gotten better in recent games, and I imagine that part of that is adjustments on UVA's part and part of it is refs feeling less of a need to over-emphasize the new rules.

I'm not a "complain about the refs" type. I can admit when my teams foul, and even when I disagree with calls, I generally understand why they were made (particularly when it's Mike Tobey pulling his "Who, me?" routine in the post). But guys like Thompson and Perrantes are getting cheap fouls every game for doing nothing more than staying in front of guys late in the shot clock. That's garbage.

At least you folks (probably) never had one of your players featured in a referee-training video about block/charge rules/interpretation. (Still hacks me off a bit to this day about that :mad:.)

weezie
01-08-2016, 07:49 PM
So-so. I may be alone in my mystification at the so-called "verticality" rule and how it seems to be mostly ignored by the refs. Any elevation by a big defender is getting called, whether he's already in the air or not.

g-money
01-08-2016, 10:19 PM
I like the FOM emphasis and hope it continues. I was amazed by how clean (i.e. free of contact on the perimeter) the Duke-WF game was a few days ago. It is so much fun to watch the penetration and passing that has resulted from the elimination of the hand check.

The NBA has clearly benefited from a similar correction - their product has improved dramatically over the past decade. Steph Curry would probably be half the player he is today if the NBA hadn't started enforcing the no-hand-check rule a decade ago - as would many of the NBA's current crop of great PGs.

I just hope the renewed emphasis on calling fouls will filter down to the junior levels of basketball. Watching my sons' NJB games (basically one step below AAU in California) this year has been a bit like watching the NBA in the late 90's, except with players that are 1-2' shorter. :)

Indoor66
01-09-2016, 08:02 AM
I like the FOM emphasis and hope it continues. I was amazed by how clean (i.e. free of contact on the perimeter) the Duke-WF game was a few days ago. It is so much fun to watch the penetration and passing that has resulted from the elimination of the hand check.

The NBA has clearly benefited from a similar correction - their product has improved dramatically over the past decade. Steph Curry would probably be half the player he is today if the NBA hadn't started enforcing the no-hand-check rule a decade ago - as would many of the NBA's current crop of great PGs.

I just hope the renewed emphasis on calling fouls will filter down to the junior levels of basketball. Watching my sons' NJB games (basically one step below AAU in California) this year has been a bit like watching the NBA in the late 90's, except with players that are 1-2' shorter. :)

It takes some of the muscle out of the game and, to me, this is a lot better.

oldnavy
01-09-2016, 08:38 AM
I just want consistency. In the Wake game, the 4th foul (charge) call on Matt Jones was bogus, but OK, if that's what you are going to call a charge (doesn't fit the FOM narrative IMO), then fine..... however the next play down the court had Greyson pick up his 4th foul (blocking) on a play where the dribbler initiated the contact just as Matt did 10 seconds earlier.... This is what drives me nuts. I actually thought both should have been no calls, but at the least they both should have been called the same way. I know it must drive the coaches and players crazy.

Forget the season, I'll settle for consistency for a full game.

Kfanarmy
01-15-2016, 11:30 AM
Is it me, or did the Big 12 decide not to enforce these rules, and many others, against WVU? I've seen parts of a couple of their games this year, and they are worse than any of Calhoun's foulapalooza teams. Huggins seems to have just said "to heck with the rules; let's see if the officials are willing to 'stop' the game in order to make us follow them." If the officials call 50% of the fouls committed by the Mountaineers, WVU fans will have to suit up at the 10:00 mark in the 1st half against Oklahoma tonight. Its unfortunate that the conference is allowing them to play like that. When they get a tight officiating crew in the tourney, they're gone, just as predicted and played out against UK last year. I just don't understand why a conference allows a team to play that way. Frenetic is one thing, the constant fouling: holding, moving screens, bumping shooters, is just ridiculous.

devildeac
01-15-2016, 01:55 PM
Is it me, or did the Big 12 decide not to enforce these rules, and many others, against WVU? I've seen parts of a couple of their games this year, and they are worse than any of Calhoun's foulapalooza teams. Huggins seems to have just said "to heck with the rules; let's see if the officials are willing to 'stop' the game in order to make us follow them." If the officials call 50% of the fouls committed by the Mountaineers, WVU fans will have to suit up at the 10:00 mark in the 1st half against Oklahoma tonight. Its unfortunate that the conference is allowing them to play like that. When they get a tight officiating crew in the tourney, they're gone, just as predicted and played out against UK last year. I just don't understand why a conference allows a team to play that way. Frenetic is one thing, the constant fouling: holding, moving screens, bumping shooters, is just ridiculous.

Sure worked Wednesday night vs Clemson :rolleyes: . Oh, wait, their coach said they work on "not fouling."

oakvillebluedevil
01-15-2016, 02:01 PM
So-so. I may be alone in my mystification at the so-called "verticality" rule and how it seems to be mostly ignored by the refs. Any elevation by a big defender is getting called, whether he's already in the air or not.

Strongly agree with this.

Why cant we have the best of both worlds? Two hands on anyone is an automatic foul, and if you are straight up when you contest a shot you cannot be called for a a foul, regardless of where you are?

This would lead to the best version of the game IMO, and would remove the incentive to just drive wildly out of control praying for a foul.

devildeac
01-25-2016, 10:42 PM
After tonight, almost laughable :mad: .

CoachJ10
01-25-2016, 11:52 PM
After tonight, almost laughable :mad: .

If they actually were enforcing FOM, Grayson and Brandon would both be shooting 10 fts a night. Tonight was no exeception.

smvalkyries
01-26-2016, 02:52 AM
Miami adjusted to the refs and played D more or less the sa,e way they had the last 3 years. Duke did not adjust, we started and stayed in a zone, mostly in my opinion because of FOM.
In FOM permieter defenders seem to be allowed to use their hands in man-to=man under FOM they are stuck to their sides. Yes I know, somw could say we are zoning due to rebounding (fallacious), foul issues, to provide rest for our short rotation but in my opinion mostly because it is pretty much imposible to provide pressure and prevent penetration under FOM man to man. I think you will see more and more zone both by us and against us. I don't see this as speeding up or improving the game. In fact the biggest drawback I see is that it means that an under sized team doesn't have much of a chance to make up for its deficiency against a bigger slower team with great perimeter defense. One thing is certain- the games become mismatches when one team adjusts to the referees and the other does not which ever way the refs are going to call them.
One more point, if you want to make the college game more like the NBA team where are you going to find 2-3 rim protectors for every college team? No NBA team is forced to play without more than one rim protector. There are just a lot more quality perimeter defensive players than there are quality rim protectors-so by mandating 40% rim protectors at the expense of the wings how is that improving the quality of the game? Oh by the way I am a college basketball fan- I really don't like or follow the pro game anywhere near as much.

jv001
01-26-2016, 09:47 AM
Miami adjusted to the refs and played D more or less the sa,e way they had the last 3 years. Duke did not adjust, we started and stayed in a zone, mostly in my opinion because of FOM.
In FOM permieter defenders seem to be allowed to use their hands in man-to=man under FOM they are stuck to their sides. Yes I know, somw could say we are zoning due to rebounding (fallacious), foul issues, to provide rest for our short rotation but in my opinion mostly because it is pretty much imposible to provide pressure and prevent penetration under FOM man to man. I think you will see more and more zone both by us and against us. I don't see this as speeding up or improving the game. In fact the biggest drawback I see is that it means that an under sized team doesn't have much of a chance to make up for its deficiency against a bigger slower team with great perimeter defense. One thing is certain- the games become mismatches when one team adjusts to the referees and the other does not which ever way the refs are going to call them.
One more point, if you want to make the college game more like the NBA team where are you going to find 2-3 rim protectors for every college team? No NBA team is forced to play without more than one rim protector. There are just a lot more quality perimeter defensive players than there are quality rim protectors-so by mandating 40% rim protectors at the expense of the wings how is that improving the quality of the game? Oh by the way I am a college basketball fan- I really don't like or follow the pro game anywhere near as much.

Up real early for an attorney? Get that cup of coffee and you'll be just fine :cool: GoDuke!

FerryFor50
01-27-2016, 12:02 AM
Want a shining example of how officials keep ignoring fouls and freedom of motion rules?

Watch the Nevada/San Diego State game. Hardly ANYTHING is getting called. Super physical and hard to imagine things not getting out of hand.

Wheat/"/"/"
01-27-2016, 03:59 PM
So-so. I may be alone in my mystification at the so-called "verticality" rule and how it seems to be mostly ignored by the refs. Any elevation by a big defender is getting called, whether he's already in the air or not.

I agree too with your "verticallity" comment.

Freedom of movement is one thing... But I'm also seeing too much called on drives to the basket when the defender is moving his feet and in solid position, hands straight up....an then the driver jumps into the defender at the rim, creating the contact...then they go looking for a call.....a good ref should never bail out a driver who creates the contact...he should have to finish through it as no call or be called for a charge if it's too extreme.

devildeac
02-03-2016, 07:17 AM
So FerryFor50 (and I) are not the only ones noticing/complaining about this, especially during chat last PM as Allen was repeatedly held and bumped on drives and getting around screens:

http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/nc-state/article57865478.html


"Free throws and fouls increased across the board in November as officials called more hand-checking fouls and bumping away from the ball.

The November emphasis went by the wayside in N.C. State’s first game in February, Gottfried said.

“My personal opinion, I thought it was way too physical,” Gottfried said. “They allowed Florida State to bump (N.C. State guard Cat Barber) and put their hands on (Barber) too much.”

TruBlu
02-03-2016, 08:14 AM
So FerryFor50 (and I) are not the only ones noticing/complaining about this, especially during chat last PM as Allen was repeatedly held and bumped on drives and getting around screens:

http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/college/acc/nc-state/article57865478.html


"Free throws and fouls increased across the board in November as officials called more hand-checking fouls and bumping away from the ball.

The November emphasis went by the wayside in N.C. State’s first game in February, Gottfried said.

“My personal opinion, I thought it was way too physical,” Gottfried said. “They allowed Florida State to bump (N.C. State guard Cat Barber) and put their hands on (Barber) too much.”

I'm willing to wager that Gottfried didn't complain too much when his players were bumping and grabbing AG.

devildeac
02-03-2016, 09:27 AM
I'm willing to wager that Gottfried didn't complain too much when his players were bumping and grabbing AG.

Sounds like he complained enough to "invite" the head of NCAA officials to view some game tapes (and likely some eastern NC 'cue) with him.

CoachJ10
02-20-2016, 02:11 PM
Well the freedom of movement emphasis went out the window today. Louisville dared the refs to call their nonstop fouling and the refs not only blinked, but encouraged their dirty play.

These 3 refs today should never ref another acc game again.

FerryFor50
02-20-2016, 02:16 PM
This is how I feel about the FOM rules:

5995

CDu
02-20-2016, 02:55 PM
This is how I feel about the FOM rules:

5995

That is not how I feel about the rules. That is how I feel about the officials' ability/willingness to enforce them.

FerryFor50
02-20-2016, 02:56 PM
That is not how I feel about the rules. That is how I feel about the officials' ability/willingness to enforce them.

That's a good point. :cool:

weezie
02-20-2016, 04:30 PM
...That is how I feel about the officials' ability/willingness to enforce them.

And the intelligence needed to understand the rules which across the board in all games this season, not just ours, the refs have clearly proved they do not have.

FerryFor50
02-21-2016, 02:49 PM
How Ben Swain feels:

http://sportschannel8.com/2016/02/21/dukes-grayson-allen-for-many-reasons-needs-to-head-to-the-nba/

g-money
02-21-2016, 03:06 PM
How Ben Swain feels:

http://sportschannel8.com/2016/02/21/dukes-grayson-allen-for-many-reasons-needs-to-head-to-the-nba/

I hate to say this as a Duke fan, but I agree with this article. Grayson should get a contract before he gets hurt.

devildeac
02-21-2016, 05:28 PM
How Ben Swain feels:

http://sportschannel8.com/2016/02/21/dukes-grayson-allen-for-many-reasons-needs-to-head-to-the-nba/


I hate to say this as a Duke fan, but I agree with this article. Grayson should get a contract before he gets hurt.

Nice find/read. One error: he was fouled (probably twice) before his travel :p .