Remove free throws from the game.

[Tony]

I just had this idea about removing free throws from the game. IIIII thought it was a pretty good idea...

If a ref calls a foul, continue the game and have judges determine whether or not it was a foul. If it was, add the two or three points (or one if they made the basket.) If it wasn't a foul then don't add any points but also take the foul off the player it was called on.

A coach or player can argue a no call but they'd only have a limited number of times they can argue. Just to keep the players honest and add a level of strategicness. Say you have 5 times you can argue a no call, you'd want to make sure you're honest so you don't miss out on any possible points.

This would make flopping pointless, correct refs on bad calls/no calls, and most importantly, it would make the game more fair.

 

[UGLI baby]

I just had this idea about removing free throws from the game. IIIII thought it was a pretty good idea...

If a ref calls a foul, continue the game and have judges determine whether or not it was a foul. If it was, add the two or three points (or one if they made the basket.) If it wasn't a foul then don't add any points but also take the foul off the player it was called on.

A coach or player can argue a no call but they'd only have a limited number of times they can argue. Just to keep the players honest and add a level of strategicness. Say you have 5 times you can argue a no call, you'd want to make sure you're honest so you don't miss out on any possible points.

This would make flopping pointless, correct refs on bad calls/no calls, and most importantly, it would make the game more fair.

The judges thing isn't a bad idea. There's obviously a million reasons why this wouldn't work. Like, a guy goes up for a shot, gets fouled, misses, then a guy on his team grabs the offensive rebound and dunks it for 2 Pts. That 2 Pts doesn't count because of the foul, then later the foul is waved off by the judges and the team that got "fouled" is screwed.

The new trend in the league would be the anti flop. This is where you make it look like you fouled a guy, thus ending the possession, but upon further review the judges would see that you didn't actually foul the guy.

It would be bizarro world.

 

[Tony]

lol I didn't think about that. Maybe throwing the ball in after a foul is called would suffice. But I could see how that anti flop would make things weird.

 

[Tony]

Before the throw in there would have to be a short time where players could quickly switch out. I just thought about how the free throw time is used to rotate players.

 

[Dr. Jones]

Somebody come up with some rule that penalizes anti-anti-flops .. so only geniuses like Franklin can determine the outcome of a game. (Hint: He's a Jazz fan)

 

[Tony]

Actually the anti flop would be pretty pointless if the player "fouled" throws it in. If the refs caught on they could just call it a delay of game.

And even have charges be quickly reviewed to see who gets possession.

 

[addictionary]

free throws slow the pace of the game. it's bad for the fans. it's good for the players. I already hate the amount of timeouts both teams are allowed. and without the free throws they will have more of those. also, not every player is as good as the other at hitting the open jumpers so giving the points sounds like an unfair idea. but correcting the ref calls by the word of the judges is a good idea, it must be done more often. and while at it, any flopper - I mean any YES even my native Ömer Aşık- must be exterminated mercilessly in front of the crowd. I hate floppers.

 

[mellow]

Freethrows only lead to trouble--[video=youtube_share;ZXA9F4H4H-o]https://youtu.be/ZXA9F4H4H-o

 

[YB85]

And miss stuff like this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-MW5tkTWtQ

 

[NAOS]

... good Lord.

 

[carolinajazz]

Freethrows only lead to trouble--[video=youtube_share;ZXA9F4H4H-o]https://youtu.be/ZXA9F4H4H-o

....that PUNK needs to be suspended for a MONTH! What an idiot!!! And as far as removing free-throws from the game.....that's about as ridiculous of an idea as I've ever heard! What they should do to get control of the game is make any INTENTIONAL foul a two shot foul and you retain possession of the ball! That would put basketball where it should be.......the non-contact sport it was intended to be! There is way too much hacking, pushing, shoving going on and it escalates into fights!

 

[carolinajazz]

By the way, here's his feeble explanation for what he did: "I guess the ref didn't let me have the ball so we kind of got into a tug of war," Johnson said. "No words were really said and he rejected me out of the game and I kind of lost my cool from there." I think the word he was looking for was EJECTED from the game. He then added: "My teammates know me, my parents know me ... I never lose my cool. I never said anything to a ref or got mad," he said. "The only techs I've gotten were for hanging on the rim or slapping the backboard." Obviously, stiffer punishments should be in order for those pathetic displays of egotism as well! What's the great accomplishment for a 6 ft 9 inch guy being able to "hang on the rim?" His coaches reaction to his lunacy? "I don't know what happened with Amir. He kind of lost his mind there for a little bit," Casey said. "I told him we can't have that on a night where we're short-handed and we're in a situation where we're scrambling. We just gotta have more discipline than that."
Frankly, I doubt this clown can remember how to run 3 plays! Also sounds like a guy who probably carries a loaded guy in his house and car.......ready to cap someone who crosses his way!

 

[JimLes]

They should change the way fouls work, period. They should look at the intent and call accordingly. A foul should be called when a player was illegally impeded by an opponent, not when a player goes out of his way to put himself in a position where he is going to get fouled. A foul should be restitution for something done against you, not a reward. You shouldn't want a foul committed on you, you should want to succeed in your earlier intent. That's the problem with the league. Too many times, "shots" are taken not with any real intention of making them, but with the intention of getting a foul called. There's something difficult to accept about that.

It's like the way car insurance works. Insurance companies exist because you want some restitution in that crappy situation where someone hits your car. Ideally, you just want to drive around without getting hit. You shouldn't drive around hoping to get hit so you can get money or write off your car.

 

[UGLI baby]

They should change the way fouls work, period. They should look at the intent and call accordingly. A foul should be called when a player was illegally impeded by an opponent, not when a player goes out of his way to put himself in a position where he is going to get fouled. A foul should be restitution for something done against you, not a reward. You shouldn't want a foul committed on you, you should want to succeed in your earlier intent. That's the problem with the league. Too many times, "shots" are taken not with any real intention of making them, but with the intention of getting a foul called. There's something difficult to accept about that.

It's like the way car insurance works. Insurance companies exist because you want some restitution in that crappy situation where someone hits your car. Ideally, you just want to drive around without getting hit. You shouldn't drive around hoping to get hit so you can get money or write off your car.

Best post in General NBA history.

Will rep when possible

 

[Hotdog]

They should change the way fouls work, period. They should look at the intent and call accordingly. A foul should be called when a player was illegally impeded by an opponent, not when a player goes out of his way to put himself in a position where he is going to get fouled. A foul should be restitution for something done against you, not a reward. You shouldn't want a foul committed on you, you should want to succeed in your earlier intent. That's the problem with the league. Too many times, "shots" are taken not with any real intention of making them, but with the intention of getting a foul called. There's something difficult to accept about that.

It's like the way car insurance works. Insurance companies exist because you want some restitution in that crappy situation where someone hits your car. Ideally, you just want to drive around without getting hit. You shouldn't drive around hoping to get hit so you can get money or write off your car.

Best post in General NBA history.

Will rep when possible

I totally agree. It all needs an overhaul. Especially the charge call.

 

[Hotdog]

The judges thing isn't a bad idea. There's obviously a million reasons why this wouldn't work. Like, a guy goes up for a shot, gets fouled, misses, then a guy on his team grabs the offensive rebound and dunks it for 2 Pts. That 2 Pts doesn't count because of the foul, then later the foul is waved off by the judges and the team that got "fouled" is screwed.

The new trend in the league would be the anti flop. This is where you make it look like you fouled a guy, thus ending the possession, but upon further review the judges would see that you didn't actually foul the guy.

It would be bizarro world.

WTF Ugli? Are you high?

At first it made sense, but then it didnt. How do you fake foul? Why not just really foul if you are close enough to make it look real?

 

[UGLI baby]

WTF Ugli? Are you high?

At first it made sense, but then it didnt. How do you fake foul? Why not just really foul if you are close enough to make it look real?

Damn it Hack.

Why do I always have to explain everything to you twice?

In the OP's idea a team would be awarded two points if they were fouled on a shot, but if the judges reviewed it and there was no foul, they wouldn't get any points.

So if you wanted to end the other teams possession, and make sure they don't get any points, you'd do something to make it look like you fouled the guy so that the refs would blow the whistle ending the possession and giving that team 2 points, subject to review by the judges. Then, when the judges looked at it, they would see it wasn't really a foul and the refs shouldnt have blown the whistle and they would award the offensive team zero points.

So the offensive team got fake fouled, the refs fell for it ending the possession, but the judges award the team zero points because it wasn't a foul. Win for the defense.

#duh

 

[UGLI baby]

Ref says, "*** yo free throws *****"

 

[JimLes]

Man, Kris Humphries is a walking punch line, isn't he? I mean, he was traded for Araujo, Kim Kardashian fake-married him, and now he gets blocked by a ref? On a FREE THROW?