A New Basketball Rule for 2009-2010: What Was the NCAA Thinking?
Well, the NCAA has done it again.
Like they do every year, an NCAA panel met to address any rule changes for the upcoming basketball season. The panel has made three changes.
The first says that a defensive player must establish position outside of the area between the backboard and the rim in order to draw a charge.
No problem with this one because it makes it similar (but not the same) to the NBA.
The second rule change simply extends replay to flagrant foul determination.
Again, no problem here. In fact, this one makes a lot of sense because a flagrant foul means an ejection, so it is important to make the correct call.
The final one is the one I have a huge problem with. It changes the rule as to who shoots free throws if the player who was fouled cannot.
As all basketball fans know, the choice of who would shoot the free throw would be up to the coach of the team shooting, and he could pick anyone on the roster to shoot them.
Under the new rule, the choice would no longer be the coach of the shooting team. Instead, the coach of the opposing team will decide who will shoot, but can only pick from the four remaining players on the floor.
The NCAA cited that an unfair advantage was given to the shooting team under the old rule as the reason for the change.
However, doesn't this rule change it to the opposite extreme? Since the opposing coach can choose, it is obvious that he would pick the worst free throw shooter on the floor, leaving the shooting team at a disadvantage.
So the NCAA is going to punish teams for having a player get injured? Sure, let's see how this is going to work out.
Just think, your team's best free throw shooter gets hurt while driving down the lane, so instead of having the second best shooter on the line, the other coach picks your bumbling center, who only shoots 53 percent from the line.
How about the NCAA uses the middle ground and makes the coach of the shooting team pick from the four others on the floor. At least that way there wouldn't be any "unfair advantage" for either team.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?