Jeff Van Gundy Says Get Rid of The Fouling Out Rule

That's a problem that could be easily be solved. The new rule could say that anytime a player with 6 or more fouls fouls someone when that team is in the penalty, the opposing team chooses who shoots the free throws or some variation of that based on team fouls etc.

 

JVG must be losing touch with basketball reality sorta like that meaningless win at the end of the season

If there is no fouling out in games, then I'm sure most of the games will end in punches or with players bleeding. No fouling out will simply mean the NBA will turn into street games

 

Ehh I don't know if I agree with JVG on this one, but I do agree with him on the point he made on his commentating of the Lakers vs. Celtics game 1. Where he said that Technical fouls shouldn't carry over to the next series, because its like a dark cloud looming over someones head

 

This makes ten times more sense than what JVG is suggesting.

 

OR, players could just play good defense instead of fouling.
Wow, what a revelation? JVG is an idiot - if he could actually teach his team to play great defense he wouldn't be whining.

 

Yeah, I like Battier's solution better than JVG's.

And I like the idea of reviewing refs performance. I don't know about fines. But at least give them points for each bad call. And like the players, if they get to a certain amount, they get suspended. They should suspend refs for being bad.

 

This is actually a point in favor of JVG or Battier's prosposal. Star players are actually allowed to get away with "more" if they are in foul trouble, as refs don't have the balls to foul them out more often than not.

If they don't have that albatross hanging over them, they can simply call fouls without worrying about who is a superstar and how many fouls they have.

 

I liked this idea that I heard of several years ago:

Give each head coach the power to take away two fouls in each game. Fouls that are "canceled" out still lead to free throws and count toward the penalty, but they won't count toward a player's six-foul limit. This way there isn't a threat of the game being taken over by excessive fouling. What we won't be seeing anymore is stars getting benched because of two ticky tack fouls in the first quarter.

 

Who would want to watch a Rockets game where the opposing team fouls Trevor Ariza and Chuck Hayes the entire game? There would be no consequence to this style of play: hack-a-Shaq all game long. The NBA is already annoying enough to watch when it becomes a free-throw contest. How would it be any better as a free-throw contest amongst the worst shooters?

 

Actually, I wish two teams would agree to do this to force the NBA to change this rule. Maybe an end-of-season game or preseason. Shaq vs Dwight. There could be infinite fouls, too, because I remember during a Golden State game, you can stay in the game when you go over the foul limit if there are not enough dressed players to substitute in.

It'd make the game look like a joke. Could you imagine 6 hours of Shaq and Dwight free throw contest? It would be hilariously awful. :grin:

 

Because every street game result in a fist fight

There will still be flagrant fouls and ejections, more fouls=more freethrows for the other team.

 

I would have to disagree with JVG on this one. All this would do is players reluctant to play real defence, but instead foul everytime when a player is about to score. make them shoot free throws instead of scoring. That would just make the game slow and boring.

What I think would help is allowing a questioning process of arguable calls. Just like how video replay is allowed on certain plays, team coaches are allowed to question 1 call in the last 2 mins of the game. This would force the refs to be more careful and also allow teams to make an arguement. It would not slow the game down and allows for players to just play instead of worring about bad calls being made.

 

That can be fixed. If the player who fouled has 7 or more fouls, the opposing team gets to choose who shoots the FTs.

 

There wouldn't be unlimited fouls because teams would still be in the penalty. Why would a team commit a foul and give up free throws on purpose?

 

The hack a shaq problem has already been addressed. If a player is fouled without the ball during the penalty, anyone can shoot the free throw.

 

The hack a shaq problem has already been addressed. If a player without the ball is fouled during the penalty, anyone can shoot the free throw.

 

I'm pretty sure most JVG teams played great defense.

 

My only probelm is this, let's say the Magic are playing the Kings. Now the Kings know they have no big man capable of stopping Dwight Howard. So what do they do? Every single time Dwight Howard gets the ball Spencer Hawes or Carl Landry intentionally fouls him so he can shoot free throws. Imagine this almost every time the Magic had the ball, it could go on forever.

The upside to the scenario I just mentioned, is it might force Dwight to learn how to hit the easiest shot in basketball