PDA

View Full Version : NCAA takes charge in 'no-charge zone' discussion (arc could be coming)



CDC84
05-04-2011, 03:07 PM
It's worth reading the whole article. In addition to the traditional difficulty of making the charge/block call, there is an increasing concern for player safety underneath the basket.

http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-basketball/story/2011-05-04/ncaa-takes-charge-in-no-charge-zone-discussion


The days of guesswork regarding whether a defender is beneath the basket while attempting to draw a charge will be over if a new proposal from the NCAA men's basketball rules committee is adopted.

The committee unanimously voted that an arc should be painted in the foul lane that would extend three feet from the center of the goal. Any secondary defender looking to draw a charge while inside that area would not be granted a call.


“We have been very deliberate with our research and consideration of this rule. We believe this is the natural progression from all the data and feedback we’ve received,” rules committee chair Mike Brey, head coach at Notre Dame, told the NCAA News. “A high percentage of coaches and administrators favored a visual mark on the floor.”

For the past two years, officials were instructed to use their judgment regarding whether a secondary defender was beneath the goal when attempting to draw a charge. Many criticized this approach, but the committee took that approach because members felt adding another marking to the court without phasing in the rule might meet with some resistance.

For the no-charge zone to be adopted, it must be approved by the NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel, which meets in early June. If members of that group agree, it would be in place for the 2011-12 season.

Other rule change suggestions:


* The language regarding extraordinary personal fouls will change. What used to be considered an intentional foul—an elbow that did not make excessive contact—will now be termed a “Flagrant 1” foul. In that case, the player fouled would receive two free throws and his team gain possession of the ball. What had been a flagrant foul—an elbow that made severe contact above the shoulders, for instance—would now be a “Flagrant 2” foul. The penalty would be the same, plus ejection of the offending player.


* If a team is late returning to the court after a timeout, it will receive a warning. If it is late on subsequent occasions, officials will allow play to begin immediately—whether that means commencing the five-second count or allowing the ball to be inbounded.

75Zag
05-04-2011, 06:25 PM
Interesting that the picture accompanying the article is a Duke player being charged upon (maybe).

My belief is that the new rule and the possible arc are intended to give more advantage to the elite powerhouse schools. Young Mr. Stockton setting up under the basket is unlikely to injure any of the big elites crashing into him, but when he draws the offensive foul the big boys don't like it.

Just my 2 cents worth.

Go Bulldogs! Get Bigger! No Thugs!

MDABE80
05-04-2011, 06:33 PM
Looks like over-regulation. Anyone remember a player being damaged with the most recent rules? It sounds like the concern for the kids taking charges........but is it real? I cannot remember one player who was injured taking a charge.

wazZag
05-04-2011, 06:43 PM
Elias Harris would prefer that it is located about two feet after the free throw line.

CDC84
05-04-2011, 08:25 PM
My belief is that the new rule and the possible arc are intended to give more advantage to the elite powerhouse schools. Young Mr. Stockton setting up under the basket is unlikely to injure any of the big elites crashing into him, but when he draws the offensive foul the big boys don't like it.

It's Mr. Stockton they're worried about. There have been players who have received mild concussions due to the back of their heads slamming against the floor while trying to take a charge. Some of the collisions underneath the hoop are getting pretty violent these days because players are trying to beat the floppers to the basket. Of course the same sort of head injuries could happen when a player pursues a rebound or dives out of bounds for a loose ball. There are risks in everything. It's not enough of a reason to draw an arc.

What I don't understand is why the arc has to extend 3 feet beyond the basket. The point of emphasis last offseason had to do with players standing directly underneath the basket. A player standing 2.5 feet in front of the basket is not underneath the basket.

willandi
05-04-2011, 08:54 PM
I have issues with the 'elbow' rule. I agree that any player throwing his elbows with the intention of striking another player should be penalized. But... how does a rebounder (think Sacre) keep the opposing players from grabbing, scratching etc, in an effort to tie up a controlled rebound. The opposing player should be called for a foul. And what makes it more egregious for an elbow thrown by a 7' player, striking above the neck, than an elbow thrown by a 6' player striking below the waist.
It seems as if the rules are being enacted to punish the larger/taller players while allowing the more diminuative players greater latitude in regards to their actions on the court.

SWZag
05-04-2011, 11:16 PM
So is every bit of contact under the basket a block? Or are we going to see more "no calls" because it's either a "no call" or a block.

I don't like having more regulation. Just call the current rules and the game would be just fine.

SWZag

ExtremeJim
05-05-2011, 06:57 AM
What I don't understand is why the arc has to extend 3 feet beyond the basket. The point of emphasis last offseason had to do with players standing directly underneath the basket. A player standing 2.5 feet in front of the basket is not underneath the basket.

A defensive player has lateral dimension. The point of the rule is as much the area being defended as the location of the player's feet. Ergo, one can have a hand directly under the basket challenging the shot (or the dribble leading to the shot) at the same time your feet would be up to several feet away, hence the arc.


It sounds like the concern for the kids taking charges........but is it real? I cannot remember one player who was injured taking a charge.

The rule is also to protect the offensive player from injuries resulting from a defender sliding in under him while he's in the air completing a dunk or a layup. Coming down and finding a small body on the floor rather than the level hardwood you were anticipating causes ankle and knee injuries, occasionally worse.


So is every bit of contact under the basket a block? Or are we going to see more "no calls" because it's either a "no call" or a block.SWZag

Remember, the rule applies to "secondary" (help) defenders, not to the player who arrived at the basket having defended that offensive player throughout his current possession of the ball.

The painted arc was inevitable because during the first year of the rule officials called it 70-80% of the time, but last year they somewhat reverted to the old usage. David Stockton drew at least a half-dozen "charges" under the basket as a secondary defender this past season when the rule said every one of them should have been ruled a block. A painted arc will give supervisors of officials something with which to train their people with videotape of past calls. Leaving aside the question of whether the rule should have been enacted in the first place, if you want to have it, the arc is kind of essential.

CDC84
05-05-2011, 07:58 AM
So is every bit of contact under the basket a block? Or are we going to see more "no calls" because it's either a "no call" or a block.

About the point of emphasis last offseason:

http://content.military.com/entertainment/sports/nascar/at-last-ncaa-rules-committee-addresses-charging-issue


Until now, there had been an understanding that officials should not issue charging fouls when the defender was directly beneath the goal, but it wasn't codified and therefore was administered haphazardly. Sometimes it was a charge, sometimes a block, and sometimes the ref would do that imperious little hand gesture that screamed, "Get up; I'm not falling for your Brando routine."

"We've really created another absolute," said John Adams, the NCAA's coordinator of officials. "If you're a secondary defender and you're under the basket and you take contact, you're guilty of a block."

The only thing that an arc would do, in theory, is make it easier for officials to make a call they are supposed to be making.