Should the NBA Change Foul Limit Rules?

[Saint Cy of JFC]

It's been a huge bummer watching the first two games and seeing how much influence the refs have had with handing star/important players early foul trouble.

Game 1 was decided by Gobert/Conley getting in foul trouble and Game 2 was heavily influenced by Jonas/Brooks having early foul trouble,

So my proposal would be: Instead of fouling out, when a player gets their 6th foul, they have to sit for a certain number of game time minutes.

So on the 6th foul a player has to sit for two minutes of game time, on the 7th three minutes, and so on and so forth.

The main point would be to eliminate the impact of early foul trouble so coaches wouldn't be so scared to play their best players. There are still major consequences if a guy has heavy foul trouble late in a game (like if you get your 7th foul in the final 5 minutes, you are out for over half the remaining time), but it isn't as devastating as losing a player completely.

I know people hate change so this will probably be railed, but any would like this idea or have an alternatives ideas?

 

[One Brow]

There's a decent change this would make the game significantly more physical, causing more injuries.

 

[LogGrad98]

It's been a huge bummer watching the first two games and seeing how much influence the refs have had with handing star/important players early foul trouble.

Game 1 was decided by Gobert/Conley getting in foul trouble and Game 2 was heavily influenced by Jonas/Brooks having early foul trouble,

So my proposal would be: Instead of fouling out, when a player gets their 6th foul, they have to sit for a certain number of game time minutes.

So on the 6th foul a player has to sit for two minutes of game time, on the 7th three minutes, and so on and so forth.

The main point would be to eliminate the impact of early foul trouble so coaches wouldn't be so scared to play their best players. There are still major consequences if a guy has heavy foul trouble late in a game (like if you get your 7th foul in the final 5 minutes, you are out for over half the remaining time), but it isn't as devastating as losing a player completely.

I know people hate change so this will probably be railed, but any would like this idea or have an alternatives ideas?

So the hockey rule basically. Might be interesting.

 

[infection]

It rewards fouling.

 

[LogGrad98]

I think if anything you just give everyone one more foul. Bump it to 7 instead if 6 to foul out.

 

[Douchebag K]

Dunno bout the 7th, that’s prob getting too complex but the idea of say 5 mins off with the 6th foul is intriguing

 

[LogGrad98]

You could also change the free throw situation for fouls instead. So once a player gets their 3rd foul, every foul by that player after that generates free throws no matter what. Once they get to 6 fouls each foul after generates free throws and possession, as well as forcing that player to sub out until the next dead ball situation to sub back in.

 

[SteakNEggs]

I don't think this would be an issue if the NBA reffing wasn't so incredibly inconsistent. Game 1 & 2 were reffed completely opposite of each other.

 

[SoUjazzfan]

Review each game and hold refs accountable. Bonus for well called games, fines and eventual dismissal for poorly called ones.

 

[LogGrad98]

Review each game and hold refs accountable. Bonus for well called games, fines and eventual dismissal for poorly called ones.

The problem is, as we see in things like the 2-minute report and even the occasional comment they make on controversial calls, is that they are policing themselves so there is incentive to gloss over the bad calls entirely. Supposedly they use a scoring system to determine which officials get to ref the playoffs but it was still a joke. There is really no good way to correct the officiating, unless the owners got up in arms about it and demanded the league do something about it. But since the league favors officiating that promotes the bigger ticket teams and players, and since the owners have profit-sharing arrangements, none of them really care. Cuban cared until they won their championship, now he doesn't care any more. It's never going to change. If anything it will continue to get worse, imo.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Review each game and hold refs accountable. Bonus for well called games, fines and eventual dismissal for poorly called ones.

That happens already.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

There's a decent change this would make the game significantly more physical, causing more injuries.

Would it though? It's not like stars could rack up free fouls. If a star is going into the 4th quarter with 5 or more fouls, they are still walking on egg shells, but not to the extent they are now.

 

[DasJazz]

No they should not. What they should do is adjust some of the foul rules to the 90s era so players are actually allowed to guard their opponents.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

No they should not. What they should do is adjust some of the foul rules to the 90s era so players are actually allowed to guard their opponents.

A rule adjustment wont matter in regards to how they call it. There will always be bad calls. The point of what i'm saying is to curb the effect of a bad call so it's not devastating/game-changing in the 1st quarter.

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

I don't think this would be an issue if the NBA reffing wasn't so incredibly inconsistent. Game 1 & 2 were reffed completely opposite of each other.

This is the real issue... that and 50% of the calls in the league are based off of player reaction and not seeing the actual contact.

 

[NUMBERICA]

Only thing I’d be interested in is letting fouled out players back in the game for overtime (where they’d get one more foul).

 

[Nicksti]

Would it though? It's not like stars could rack up free fouls. If a star is going into the 4th quarter with 5 or more fouls, they are still walking on egg shells, but not to the extent they are now.

The more money you have the more you spend. Same would happen with fouls.

 

[gomretat]

I don't think this would be an issue if the NBA reffing wasn't so incredibly inconsistent. Game 1 & 2 were reffed completely opposite of each other.

And game 2 was reffed incredibly inconsistent throughout the game - very poorly officiated game. That is a bigger issue for me then between games.

 

[fishonjazz]

Eh, how often do players foul out? Especially star players.
How many players fouled out last night?
Coaches over react and sit guys when they don't need to. Guys almost never foul out (especially stars) even when they get 3 fouls in the first half or whatever.
I would just play my normal rotation when guys get in foul trouble knowing that a guy fouling out is unlikely

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app

 

[Handlogten's Heros]

And game 2 was reffed incredibly inconsistent throughout the game - very poorly officiated game. That is a bigger issue for me then between games.

disagree... they called it super tight but were consistent. Game 1 they allowed Brooks to commit several crimes against humanity but then called touch fouls on Mike.

The Rudy JV thing is a problem. You can literally call a foul on almost every play. The refs get to use their "judgement" and one player is likely disadvantaged each play.

There are a few small tweaks to the rules I would make and the biggest change I would have is I would penalize flopping and exaggerating contact. So much energy is used to trick officials or draw calls because it is rewarded handsomely.