ADVERTISEMENT

New 2024 NCAA BB Rule Changes

D

docrugby1

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jun 16, 2010
6,302
3,552
113
1. Block/Charge changed- Defender has to be in place when offensive player plants foot, rather than at the point the foot leaves the floor
2. Failed out of bounds challenge in last 2 minutes will result in loss of timeout. I do not know the penalty if a team has no timeouts left
3. Jersey numbers may now be 0-99
4, Goaltending can be reviewed at next stoppage of play
5. Experimental trial in NIT of widening lane from 12 to 16 feet
 
1. Good. Too many charges.
2. Meh.
3. Working the big issues.
4. The CCC rule.
5. Hate this. NBA has become a 3-point shooting contest. Keep the lanes where they are to encourage some semblance of a low post game.
 
Fitzphile said:
1. Good. Too many charges.
2. Meh.
3. Working the big issues.
4. The CCC rule.
5. Hate this. NBA has become a 3-point shooting contest. Keep the lanes where they are to encourage some semblance of a low post game.
Click to expand...
I agre with you 100% about widening the lane. It is stupid, like really stupid.

Regarding charges and blocks, thats a tough one. Yes, guys sliding in late to draw a "charge" is a big problem (and good riddance), but If a guy on offense jumps into a defender's vertical space and makes contact, thats got to be a no-call, never a foul on the defender. To me, those are the biggest officiating issues in college hoops.
 
How would the goaltend review work?

Would it be a review only of when it was called goaltend being possibly reversed?

Because the other way around it seems pretty problematic to me.

Imagine, refs miss the call that team A's shot should have been a goaltend, team B goes on a fast break and scores. You reverse the call, give two points to team A, but team B still gets the fast break that would not have happened if the right call was made?

Or you invalidate everything after the goal tend and play the game from the time on the clock of when the goaltend happened? By the way, this is kind of what soccer does, and it has happened. VAR has reviewed plays and awarded, say a penalty on on side of the pitch, invalidating a goal that happened on the counter attack after the missed penalty call. But they don't have to deal with the clock the same way basketball does.

Reviewing a 2 or 3 pt shot does not impact much of what happened. Game unfolded regardless. Seems logical to review. Goaltending seems a bit weird.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NJCat
GatoLouco said:
How would the goaltend review work?

Would it be a review only of when it was called goaltend being possibly reversed?

Because the other way around it seems pretty problematic to me.

Imagine, refs miss the call that team A's shot should have been a goaltend, team B goes on a fast break and scores. You reverse the call, give two points to team A, but team B still gets the fast break that would not have happened if the right call was made?

Or you invalidate everything after the goal tend and play the game from the time on the clock of when the goaltend happened? By the way, this is kind of what soccer does, and it has happened. VAR has reviewed plays and awarded, say a penalty on on side of the pitch, invalidating a goal that happened on the counter attack after the missed penalty call. But they don't have to deal with the clock the same way basketball does.

Reviewing a 2 or 3 pt shot does not impact much of what happened. Game unfolded regardless. Seems logical to review. Goaltending seems a bit weird.
Click to expand...
They will only review goaltending calls when the player sticks his arm up through the center of the rim to block a shot.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Love
Reactions: BleedingPurple15, lunker35, cedricmelons and 6 others
Expanding the lane: history has shown that style of play starts at the NBA level and eventually filters down to the colleges, then high schools. College players want to become accustomed to NBA/European styles of play. (Probably 3/4 of D1 and 1/2 of D2 players see themselves as going to the League or overseas.)
 
Fitzphile said:
They will only review goaltending calls when the player sticks his arm up through the center of the rim to block a shot.
Click to expand...
How far back will they go? Maybe 7 years?

Overturn the terrible call and use Artificial Intelligence to project the likely outcome of the game(s) after that?

I think we just lost the 2017 national championship final to North Carolina.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kelly_32 and No Chores
Educate me here, guys. What would be the reasoning behind widening the lane? Advantages? Disadvantages?
 
Fitzphile said:
They will only review goaltending calls when the player sticks his arm up through the center of the rim to block a shot.
Click to expand...
I read they will only review goaltending calls if one of the coaches is really, really mad about it!
 
Secho99 said:
Goaltending can only be reviewed if it’s called on the floor, not the other way. So this rule still would not have prevented what happened to us in 2017.
Click to expand...
Although knowing this is the rule, refs will be more likely to call goaltending even if they aren't sure, knowing it can be reversed if they are wrong. It's the same as NFL officials not calling the runner down on fumble plays.
 
TheC said:
Although knowing this is the rule, refs will be more likely to call goaltending even if they aren't sure, knowing it can be reversed if they are wrong. It's the same as NFL officials not calling the runner down on fumble plays.
Click to expand...
Except, like all replay systems, we assume the official is correct because overturning their call would hurt their feelings. Even if they’re specifically gaming the system themselves.

The ruling on the field is that the runner was not down by contact. It has been upheld due to lack of video evidence.

For goaltends, @TheC has it right. Let’s baseline each head coach’s level of volume and animation after close calls, and automatically stop the game if their ANGER metric exceeds two standard deviations following a blocked shot near the hoop. No pesky challenges. Just visual and audio measurements. (Maybe heart rate monitors too?)
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheC
TheC said:
Although knowing this is the rule, refs will be more likely to call goaltending even if they aren't sure, knowing it can be reversed if they are wrong. It's the same as NFL officials not calling the runner down on fumble plays.
Click to expand...
"Officials will be able to review goaltending/basket interference calls during the next media timeout to ensure the calls were accurate, as long as the official calls it on the floor."

and what do they do after the ref calls goaltending and it gets overturned later?
Take away the points and ????
That assumes that the defense would have gotten the rebound?
Seems pretty weird.

If they feel compelled to review these calls, it should be the other way - an uncalled, obvious goaltending is counted as a basket retroactively.
 
NUCat320 said:
For goaltends, @TheC has it right. Let’s baseline each head coach’s level of volume and animation after close calls, and automatically stop the game if their ANGER metric exceeds two standard deviations following a blocked shot near the hoop.
Click to expand...
Fran McCaffrey's head would explode if he exceeds 2 sigma of his average anger.

fran.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: NUCat320 and TheC
NURoseBowl said:
Educate me here, guys. What would be the reasoning behind widening the lane? Advantages? Disadvantages?
Click to expand...
Widening the lane could impact a few things. It definitely as others have pointed out effects the post game though 3 seconds is rarely called anymore. A hope of widening the lane is to open it up more for more drives to the basket I would think.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vassar69
hollandnucat said:
Widening the lane could impact a few things. It definitely as others have pointed out effects the post game though 3 seconds is rarely called anymore. A hope of widening the lane is to open it up more for more drives to the basket I would think.
Click to expand...
Yeah I think that’s the big reason for it. Opens up the lane more to promote more driving at the basket rather than just teams bricking 3s
 
  • Wow
Reactions: PurpleWhiteBoy
NVAcat said:
Yes, except 3 seconds is hardly ever called now even when players basically take up residence in the lane.
Click to expand...
Just a guess, but if you widen the lane to promote movement, you'd also make 3 seconds a point of emphasis for refs. I should point out that besides promoting movement, in theory you'll also reduce physicality from bigs banging into each other during post-ups and positioning for rebounds.

When I watch a game in person, I try to identify 3 Seconds Guy, who in the second half, out of frustration, will start yelling for it the second a big man puts his toe in the lane and especially—incorrectly—when the player gets the ball and is attempting to score.

There's also a fair amount of nuance with 3-second rulings. Is a player's intent to camp out in the lane, or is his movement being restricted by a double team? Is a big posting up closer to the free throw line really generating an advantage? Yes, the rule is the rule, but we also want refs to consider the reason for it and whether it's worth mucking up the game with a lot of whistles.
 
Vassar69 said:
Yeah I think that’s the big reason for it. Opens up the lane more to promote more driving at the basket rather than just teams bricking 3s
Click to expand...
There isn't anything about a wider lane that forces defenders to do anything...
If the offense can't get their own guys out of the way, that seems like a coaching problem.

Fitzphile said:
So why has the NBA reached an all time high at 3 point attempts?

www.sbnation.com

The NBA is at a breaking point with three-point shooting

Teams are shooting more from deep than at any time in NBA history, and it’s causing problems.
www.sbnation.com www.sbnation.com
Click to expand...

If the NCAA wanted to encourage more drives to the basket, they'd make up a new rule that limited the number of defensive players in the lane.

They want more outside shooting and less play from the big guys. Its the sort of rule a bunch of 5'9" wannabees would come up with because they didn't like getting their shot swatted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IGNORE2
The 3 pt. line, in the NBA, was moved closer. It was already a while ago, so it would explain the rise initially but not necessarily in the last few years.

I believe analytics just kept showing the 3 pt. shot is a good shot (it's not only the EFG% thing, it's also the offensive rebound %). In turn that led to players practicing it more and more and becoming better at it. Or, at least more of them being good at it, this last one I don't think can be argued, the number of big men that can shoot is really up.

It's crazy to think Larry Bird did not attempt a single 3 pt. shot in college.

I have always felt the biggest impact of how wide the lane is would show up in the offensive rebounds. College, NBA and FIBA always had different sizes. And, for example, different rules on who can go for a rebound off a free throw.
 
PurpleWhiteBoy said:
There isn't anything about a wider lane that forces defenders to do anything...
If the offense can't get their own guys out of the way, that seems like a coaching problem.



If the NCAA wanted to encourage more drives to the basket, they'd make up a new rule that limited the number of defensive players in the lane.

They want more outside shooting and less play from the big guys. Its the sort of rule a bunch of 5'9" wannabees would come up with because they didn't like getting their shot swatted.
Click to expand...
You're right. The wider lanes make a difference in the NBA because they have a defensive 3 seconds rule. There is no such limitation in college ball.
 
TheC said:
You're right. The wider lanes make a difference in the NBA because they have a defensive 3 seconds rule. There is no such limitation in college ball.
Click to expand...
True, and maybe wider lanes won't mean much, but in a man-to-man, if the big is now on the low block a couple of feet farther away, his defender will probably need to move the same distance unless allowing easy entry passes to the low post is your strategy. On-ball defenders will also have more space to cover when ball handlers attack the rim.
 
docrugby1 said:
1. Block/Charge changed- Defender has to be in place when offensive player plants foot, rather than at the point the foot leaves the floor
2. Failed out of bounds challenge in last 2 minutes will result in loss of timeout. I do not know the penalty if a team has no timeouts left
3. Jersey numbers may now be 0-99
4, Goaltending can be reviewed at next stoppage of play
5. Experimental trial in NIT of widening lane from 12 to 16 feet
Click to expand...
I thought the original reason for not going above 5 for each digit was so refs could signal with one hand the players number. So 44 could be ref putting up two 4s Couse it gets difficult when they try to retire numbers is that there are so few available.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PurpleWhiteBoy
hdhntr1 said:
I thought the original reason for not going above 5 for each digit was so refs could signal with one hand the players number. So 44 could be ref putting up two 4s Couse it gets difficult when they try to retire numbers is that there are so few available.
Click to expand...
Fortunately NBA refs figured out they have another hand and after years of more research, the college game decided it was safe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back