Tighter foul-calling on tap

#1
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/basketball/bulls/cs-041010bullsbits,1,5143156.story?coll=cs-home-headlines



October 10, 2004, 10:40 PM CDT



Someone suggested the NBA might be planning new uniforms with skirts instead of shorts. That was one response to the annual preseason briefing from NBA officials on rules changes and what referees will be looking for this season.

Veteran NBA official Dan Crawford briefed the Bulls after practice Sunday and outlined what the referees would be watching more closely. Though there are no major rules changes this season, the league is clearly concerned about the continued scoring downturn.

So referees have been ordered to make more foul calls in certain situations that, theoretically, will create more freedom for offensive players.

The key places are from midcourt to the free-throw line extended, where any contact will be called a foul, and in the areas along the baseline toward the basket, where use of the forearm will be restricted. Also, there will be limitations on use of forearms to hold off an offensive player and fewer charges called.

Bulls players and coaches said the changes will result in many more fouls. The league clearly is pushing for more foul calls early in the season so players become accustomed to the changes. The feeling is teams will play more zone defense to keep players out of foul trouble, increasing the need for perimeter shooting.

NBA referees will be graded more closely this season, much like baseball's QuesTec system for umpires, to insure they make the new foul calls.



I hope this will mean that it will free up our shooters. It is about time they started cracking down. There was way too much grabing on the perimeter and in the post last year.
 

6th

Homer Fan Since 1985
#2
I don't think I like this. Let's have the referees decide games. :rolleyes: Yes, I think players will be in early foul trouble and team's benches will decide games. We better get a good 12th man. We are liable to need him. :eek:
 
#3
More fouls will not equal more scoring. It will not stop the trend of lower scoring each year.

It will ruin the flow of the game at times. It will make fans and coaches frustrated and put key players on the bench with foul trouble at inconvenient times. When that happens, teams will play more conservatively, the game will turn ugly and each team will look to "grit it out" to get the win.
 

6th

Homer Fan Since 1985
#4
Kev.in said:
More fouls will not equal more scoring. It will not stop the trend of lower scoring each year.

It will ruin the flow of the game at times. It will make fans and coaches frustrated and put key players on the bench with foul trouble at inconvenient times. When that happens, teams will play more conservatively, the game will turn ugly and each team will look to "grit it out" to get the win.
Kev.in, I think this is an excellant assessment and one that is more likely to happen than not. So, when their "brilliant" idea of increasing the scoring doesn't work, will they change things, or are we stuck with this for the entire season?
 
Last edited:
#5
I completely and absolutely disagree.

In the long run INCONSISTANT calling leads to more fouls called, and turning the game into a morass. If they call this consistantly: first fouls will pick up for a short time, then players will figure out what is called and what isn't, and they will adjust, finally the Rick Fox types who are no longer allowed to CONSTANTLY grab hold and molest will have to either come up with a new skill, or a new career.

I'm ALL FOR tightening up how games are called, the mugging "Playoff-Style" ball is as boring as crap to me.

I mostly hope that they call games consistantly ACROSS THE SEASON. I absolutely HATE the way they call games differently in the playoffs than they do earlyy in the season. If its a foul in December, then its a foul in April, dragnambit.

ANYTHING to save us from 1990s style Heat v Knicks type playoff games. They make me want to gouge MY OWN eyes out.
 

6th

Homer Fan Since 1985
#6
I hear ya, Doc. The problem I have is their inconsistency, as well. When the refs call the same thing for every team...every player (from beginning of the season thru the entire playoffs), it will be a huge change and a happy day in the NBA for me.
 
#7
Why don't they just make FGs worth 4 points and shots outside the perimeter worth 5 points and get it over with. That'll sure increase scoring. :D
 
#8
I believe that this tighter officiating will benefit the Kings more than it will hurt them, seeing as playing zone against the Kings is like buillding a dam out of rice paper. Greater tendency towards perimeter play = good year for Kings.

By the way, I asked Bruce Bowen what he thought about the refs cracking down on contact on defense, but he didn't say anything. He just stared...I'll never forget that face: :(
 
#9
This doesn't sound that good to me. I don't think it addresses the consistency issue in any way, and it may make it worse. Calling plays differently depending on where the players are on the court will not improve officiating. I like the idea of making things easier on Stojakovic and the other Kings, but for NBA officiating this doesn't seem like it would be helpful.

I've said it before, but not paying attention to the extraneous situational factors when making a call would, in my opinion, be the best way to change the officiating for the better.
 
#10
These rules might not result into instant results, but they will help in the long run for greater scoring. It is really good for a high scoring team as the Kings. But bad in other way becasue we just have a 7-8 man rotation.
 
#11
doone said:
Why don't they just make FGs worth 4 points and shots outside the perimeter worth 5 points and get it over with. That'll sure increase scoring. :D
That would surely increase the number of points scored, but it wouldn't remove the ugliness of the game.
 

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#12
You know the thing is, I think they may actually be onto a significant factor in lower scoring -- how much more physically the game is played today than let's say before the Bad Boys arose. I can almost recall the teams/events which gradually stretched the bounds of "incidental contact" until the point was reached where defenders were just physically mauling guys from endline to endline (Bad Boys, Pippen bodybumping Magic fullcourt for 48 minutes a game in the '91 Finals, Riley Knicks with super-handchecking etc.). But can you really go back now? After all this time? And do it through officiating? Even I, who at least think I can remember a time before arm chucking a dribbler was legal just have a very difficult time imagining a return to that. In fact I'm not even sure I want that -- heck I play that way myself.

BTW, for those who have come to the game more recently, the inconsistency in officiating has always been there (at least since I began watching in the early 80's). The "superstar call" has always been there. The "end of the game non call" has always been there. They are almost hallmarks.
 

VF21

Super Moderator Emeritus
SME
#13
Personally, I think these rule changes may be a good thing.

I'm sure Dr. Naismith would appreciate the game returning to its roots, so to speak, in not allowing so much contact. Consistency notwithstanding, taking some of the blatant thuggery out will be a good thing IMHO.
 
#14
Some of you make a good point-- these changes could truly move the league towards higher scoring, but this is all based on two assumptions:

- That the players who get called for the fouls will learn to adapt over time.
- That officials will be totally consistent with these calls.

As long as we see players getting called for things that they should have overcome like travelling or double-dribble calls, then I doubt full compliancy among the players will ever come to fruition.

And on the second assumption, yea....right. As long as the Dick Bavettas of the world are amongst the ranks of officials, consistency will remain a dream. But still, there is a chance that this will spark higher scoring play. For those who follow football, the new rule that cornerbacks couldn't touch the receiver after 5 yards was implemented, in part, to move the game towards more dynamic play and scoring. And you'll notice that this has been the case so far (and we're only 5 weeks into the season). Anyway, my point is that these rule changes have great potential to fulfill their purpose.
 
#15
Bricklayer said:
BTW, for those who have come to the game more recently, the inconsistency in officiating has always been there (at least since I began watching in the early 80's). The "superstar call" has always been there. The "end of the game non call" has always been there. They are almost hallmarks.
I agree... it has been there as long as I can remember, and it has been the single most annoying thing about the NBA in the only 20 or so years I've been watching. Whether it can be changed is one question, whether it would be if it could is another.
 
#16
oh boy moe foul calls. with the way people brick free throws, just how is this going to increase scoring?????

but we can be sure that people like kobe, shaq, KG etc are going to continue to get all their calls, and then some. :rolleyes:
 
#18
AleksandarN said:
The key places are from midcourt to the free-throw line extended, where any contact will be called a foul, and in the areas along the baseline toward the basket, where use of the forearm will be restricted. Also, there will be limitations on use of forearms to hold off an offensive player and fewer charges called.
I guess this could actually hurt the more physical teams in the league (Detroit, San Antonio, Utah.), while helping teams like the Kings and Mavs. However, "fewer charges called" just kind of makes no sense. A charge is a charge. Simple. If a player sets his feet, gets ran into...great D. But no foul is called, what happens? More tempers, T's, and ejections. Just more of the same.
 

Bricklayer

Don't Make Me Use The Bat
#19
kingsnation said:
I guess this could actually hurt the more physical teams in the league (Detroit, San Antonio, Utah.), while helping teams like the Kings and Mavs. However, "fewer charges called" just kind of makes no sense. A charge is a charge. Simple. If a player sets his feet, gets ran into...great D. But no foul is called, what happens? More tempers, T's, and ejections. Just more of the same.
Actually I think that whole jump in front of the moving player charge should be absolutely gotten rid of. I'm not sure Derek Fisher has actually been charged into once in the last 5 years, but all he has to do is run over underneath somebody and explosively fall on his back, and voila! Insto charge. Its ridiculous. And there are entirely too many of them called.
 

6th

Homer Fan Since 1985
#20
Bricklayer said:
Actually I think that whole jump in front of the moving player charge should be absolutely gotten rid of. I'm not sure Derek Fisher has actually been charged into once in the last 5 years, but all he has to do is run over underneath somebody and explosively fall on his back, and voila! Insto charge. Its ridiculous. And there are entirely too many of them called.
That is one part that I totally agree with...call fewer charges. There are many Derek Fishers out there, he is simply the best. The TWolves come to mind.
 

piksi

Hall of Famer
#22
If I understand all of this correctly, it means that we will have more opportunities to choke on the FT line.
That will add some more gray hair on my head :eek:
 

HndsmCelt

Hall of Famer
#23
I have been thinking about the offensive foul for some time now. The problem is that while having defenders floping to break up plays has definalty lowered scoring and increased some players use of jump shots, tusly lowering shoting percentage and there by scoring, the oter side of the coin is you just cant have biger palyers pusing defenders asinde willy nilly and powering down the ball. It seems to me the current problm is not how often offensive fouls are called but the rules regaurding them. I honestly thing the solution is to redefine position as a defener from "feet planted" to a 3 or even a 5 second rule. Once a player has the ball down low the defener should be seriously stationary not just in the way. Sure this will help out guys like Shaq a bit but the big benificiaries will be forwards who run the floor like KG and hopefully Webb. By the time the big boys like Shaq or Yao get down low defenedrs are usulay already donw there. Heck even Vlade had time for a smoke while waiting for the big living room sofa to find his way down court to the paint more often than not.