Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Definitely not a good idea to remove the chance of fouling out.
Here's one... my suggestion, especially with the hacking of bad foul shooters, have the option of declining the foul.
In other words, if Dwight Howard is fouled - the team has an option
either the foul counts against the player and Howard shoots free throws
or they can decline the foul, the defensive player does not have that personal foul count against him, and the ball is taken out of bounds with no free throws.
Basketball is the only major sport where you are limited in the number of fouls. You don't get fouled out with holding penalties in football or hooking penalties in hockey.
I say get rid of the 6/5 foul limit in NBA/College. It's an archaic system and needs to go away.
Thoughts?
You have failed to put forward a persuasive argument.
Definitely not a good idea to remove the chance of fouling out.
Here's one... my suggestion, especially with the hacking of bad foul shooters, have the option of declining the foul.
In other words, if Dwight Howard is fouled - the team has an option
either the foul counts against the player and Howard shoots free throws
or they can decline the foul, the defensive player does not have that personal foul count against him, and the ball is taken out of bounds with no free throws.
It still breaks the balance so instead of fouling to get a rebound, a team can keep fouling Shaq to make him shot a free throw or never his team never gets a chance to put up an offense at all. Like the Spurs once teased on the first possession of the regular season when they went hack a Shaq for a laugh. Throw the ball in foul, take it out throw the ball in foul a second later and so on and so on.
I have thought this exact thing before...getting rid of foul outs however I came to the conclusion that it isn't a good idea. I hate how games and especially playoff games might be affected simply because the star player got 2 quick fouls...or get a 6th with 5 minutes left in the game. Did the best team really win if the best player isn't playing because of cheap or wrong foul calls by refs?
I think it should stay the way it is. If you got rid of foul outs, you will have guys fouling on every play. The pace of play will grind to a halt. Fastbreak? Foul. Dwight howard catches the ball...foul. bringing more fouls into the game would not be a way to promote the game
Definitely not a good idea to remove the chance of fouling out.
Here's one... my suggestion, especially with the hacking of bad foul shooters, have the option of declining the foul.
In other words, if Dwight Howard is fouled - the team has an option
either the foul counts against the player and Howard shoots free throws
or they can decline the foul, the defensive player does not have that personal foul count against him, and the ball is taken out of bounds with no free throws.
if fouling out doenst mater, then what would it mater if the foul counts against him or not.
removing fouling out is just a dumb idea all around.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
