Advantage Rule for basketball

[LatterDayCelticsfan]

Saw this on an Op-ed in the UK Guardian
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2016/mar/29/basketball-free-throws-timeouts-advantage-rule-soccer


the crux of the idea being adapting The “advantage” rule from Soccer and rugby to basketball, where  If it’s better for the attacking team not to be awarded a foul right away, then don’t.

Would it speed up the game at the end of the 4th quarter? Would certain phantom calls on certain guards vanish (hey, he got the bucket regardless of being breathed on by the dude guarding him)?

Or is it redundant
 

[mef730]

I may be alone in this, but the hack-a-shaq at the end don't particularly bother me. At least, they don't bother me as much as the fact that all-stars can't complete one of the most basic plays of the game, the free throw.

First option: Leave things the way they are. Make your players take 100 free throws every day in practice. If they still can't make a FT, too bad.

Second option: In the last two minutes, or for an intentional foul, or under some other construct, the team that gets fouled gets to choose who takes the shots.

Third option: Advantage rule, as discussed by the OP. My fear is that if this rule is put in effect, the defense would simply ensure that any fouls are hard enough that the offense won't get an advantage out of it.

Mike

[Moranis]

It shouldn't be necessary because it should be 2 shots and the ball if there is really a clear path to the basket.

[aefgogreen]

I may be alone in this, but the hack-a-shaq at the end don't particularly bother me. At least, they don't bother me as much as the fact that all-stars can't complete one of the most basic plays of the game, the free throw.

First option: Leave things the way they are. Make your players take 100 free throws every day in practice. If they still can't make a FT, too bad.

Second option: In the last two minutes, or for an intentional foul, or under some other construct, the team that gets fouled gets to choose who takes the shots.

Third option: Advantage rule, as discussed by the OP. My fear is that if this rule is put in effect, the defense would simply ensure that any fouls are hard enough that the offense won't get an advantage out of it.

Mike

The biggest problem I have with Hack-a-Shaq is that I don't think it really works.  Coaches implement it because they have to try something, but 9 out of 10 times (at least) it gets you nowhere.  The only thing it accomplishes is slowing down the game.  I think if a new rule was put in, whether it is the advantage rule or something else, it would be advantageous for the flow of the game.  I also don't think teams would emphasize free throw shooting any less.  Teams know games might be decided by a a few free throws.  They aren't going to practice it any less if hack-a-shaq is elminated.

[kozlodoev]

I think soccer pundits should stick to writing about soccer. It's fantastic that this guy took time to summarize the rulebook for us, but if the games "drag on" for him, he's free to go do something else.

[gift]

I sort of had a similar idea about this. My idea was to create a foul-free zone around half court (maybe inside the center circle) where a player could "hide" but also join the action when needed (and risk an intentional foul).

[safecracker]

Simple rule proposal: you get to choose whether to take the free throws or just get the possession back.
Would still generate some intentional fouling I guess (opponents get a chance to regroup their defense and hope to steal the inbound pass), but hopefully not as much.

[kozlodoev]

Simple rule proposal: you get to choose whether to take the free throws or just get the possession back.
Would still generate some intentional fouling I guess (opponents get a chance to regroup their defense and hope to steal the inbound pass), but hopefully not as much.

An even simpler proposal: learn how to shoot free throws. You only need to be a ~65% FT shooter to render the hack tactics largely inefficient.

[greece66]

As someone who has been force fed enough football soccer to know the rules despite hating the sport, I throw my two cents and proclaim the comparison altogether irrelevant.

(1) in soccer, play the advantage applies only when the foul was meaningful (ie the other team had a genuine scoring chance).

(2) the foul applies retroactively if the attacking team fails to score.

(3) the goal ofc does not apply retroactively if the referee has blown his whistle. (leading obviously to endless debates of the shoulda coulda woulda  kind among fans)

(4) this rule (as many other soccer rules) is hard to apply in an uncontroversial manner. They often make the job of the referee extremely difficult and result to both sides complaining.

For a fine illustration of the problem look below. A player of the attacking team is thrown to the ground. The referee calls for a penalty. But to his bad luck, at the exact same time an attacker scores a goal 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OeCl3s_efx4

(5) in soccer the rule is not applied to improve the entertainment's value of the sport (as the author implies) but for fairness.

(6) in any case, soccer rules can hardly serve as an example for bball. Very different 'legal' framework and culture that leave a lot more to the discretion of the referee.

tl;dr The author should go back to watching Arsenal vs ManU in his local pub; an article on the same topic from someone who actually understands bball (1) and Silver's support for a rule change (2) below

(1) http://www.sbnation.com/2016/1/21/10805888/end-intentional-fouls-nba-rule-change-andre-drummond

(2) http://www.sbnation.com/2016/2/5/10922370/adam-silver-hack-a-shaq-intentional-foul-end-change-fix


 

[kozlodoev]

tl;dr The author should go back to watching Arsenal vs ManU in his local pub;

Sadly he probably can't even do adequately, because he's based out of VA. But he shouldn't pretend he has a clue about basketball.

[PhoSita]

I like that teams can take strategic advantage of the fact that they have a foul to give, or that a player on the other team is tragically bad at free throws.

[Celtics4ever]

Leave a foul, a foul, and keep soccer 's rules to soccer.

[Hemingway]

I'd say no to this rule change idea. But then again I'd say no just just about every rule change idea.

[Ogaju]

an infraction should be punished and not rewarded. The moment you start to reward infractions rather than punish them you start down a slippery slope.

I have a more controversial suggestion... when two or more players foul an opponent they should all each be awarded personal fouls.

[greece66]

I'd say no to this rule change idea. But then again I'd say no just just about every rule change idea.

^this

i would be bring division seeding if i could

i just prefer keeping things as they are