"A "no-charge" zone marked by a semi-circle will be instituted directly under the basket , in which defensive players cannot take a charge "

GAAAAHHH I HATE this rule in the NBA, used to goto College games to watch a real games with real defense.

Skud, shoudn't the no-charge zone exist anyway just now there will be a line on the floor? I didn't think a player could draw a charge under the basket before this rule, now there is just a line on the floor to make it clearer. Or am I wrong?

anon #275478,

What exactly are you complaining about? That Sturt takes the time to teach split line help? What is your clubs doing? Probably playing zone and losing.

People complain about our full court defence and now our half court defence rules of pressure and help.

Well if it continues to help us win I'm gald, and I only wish some other clubs would try and do the same to make it competitive.

But that might be too hard and take too much effort so I doubt we will see other clubs trying to improve their juniors. Rather they will bring in ABA imports and spend their money on short term senior wins.

Skud, real defense died in the early 90's. The likes of Charles Barkley, Kevin McHale, David Robinson and Patrick Ewing have all said that numerous times.

Nowadays anyone of any size can post up and there's nothing players can do without being called on a hack attempt. If "Post Bangin'" hadn't died off, guys like Kobe and Dwayne Wade wouldn't set foot in the low post otherwise they'd be laid out on a defensive play every time.

Rules have changed to suit the size of the players. Do like the "no charge" circle. I've been begging for that to come to the NBL for years now.

If you watch good reffing at international level almost no charges are called under the basket. Hopefully this will bring Aussie refs into line and also get rid of the ridiculous push after releasing the shot call that seems to be native to Australia.

Now if we could only get rid of the automatic 'spin move = travel' interpretation that is also unique to this continent!

The 'spin-move travel' interpretation was just about the dumbest thing to happen to this league.

I think for the sake of entertaining basketball, rules related to intentional fouls towards the end of the game should be brought in.

Intentional fouls and slowing of the game is a blight.

Hardly see how the 2 are comparable. Local kids verses interstate or overseas. And that would be far less than any other club I would guess.

Agree with the Spin Move, Travel call. I noticed that any non-imports were nailed with the call regularly.

Remember Homicide doing about 10-11 spin moves through the course of the last Crocs-Sixers game and only got pinged on 1 of them. Calling a travel on a move like that takes the flair out of the modern game. Might as well remove dunking.

Agree with Paul about the reffing too. If only the quality level was present in the NBL. I've never seen such inconsistant reffing.

Reffing is a genuine concern when it comes to entertainment value / enjoying a game - and it goes beyond the usual ref bashing bit.

The NBL really needs to look at its development programs / rates of pay etc - the standard is horrendous and the inconsistancy utterly frustrating.

So because 2 quality senior players who cost nothing move to a club, it changes their junior development ability? When other clubs are spending money to bring import in? All recent sturt teams have had a large number of sturt juniors. Again with more sturt juniors then other clubs from what I can see.

And considering they weren't actually recruited but asked to move makes it very different. Especially when the clubs put more time into their own kids. With tournaments like Easter and Dandenong, plus their focus on getting better skills which people like you winge about.

"An adjustment to what used to be known as the Young Australian Player rule will see all teams required to have one Australian or New Zealand player under the age of 24 as one of their 10 contracted players (for the 2010/11 season they must have been born after 1 April 1987"

Look out for the likes of Pledger, Webster and Abercrombie to be looked at by a number of NBL clubs

is the new longer 3 point line going to come into our local district and social comps?

Secret Sabre,
The best thing about Sturt posters is that you don't need much meat on the hook to reel in 200 lb bite.

I wouldn't worry too much about comments....

Anonymous 275497, you say since Liam appeared things got better. I would not take a thing away from what PM has done at sturt with his development of juniors. Yes other clubs are a bit jealous, of Mescke though not Liam.

Sturt have been recruiting junior players from other clubs for over 40 years. How many people know that David and Phil Smyth first played juniors for South Adelaide before transferring to Sturt in their second year of under 14s?

How can such a simple thread on a completely different topic turn into yet another Sturt bash?

1. Snipe
2. Taking of bait

There will have to be a lot of extra training for 3 point shooters to adjust to the extra half metre. I hope it doesn't affect the number of shots taken and made because the 3 point shots also add to the excitement of the game. I don't know why FIBA needed to change that because as it is, there is not an automatic ability to make the 3 point shot so why make it even more difficult and affecting the excitement of the game?

Spreads the defence a bit more and opens up the paint for drives, dunks, post moves, etc.

I think youll find a lot of three point shots are taken from more than 50cm outside the line anyway. The people it will affect are the Russ Hinder's of this world. Alex Loughton struggled from the perimeter in Spain with the extended line.

So it would make sense to have a "no defensive push" zone in the same area as the "no charge zone". That way, the defenders and the attackers would have an even playing field (hmm - almost literally) chance and we might see defensive skill and footwork beat size and weight. Unbalanced rules like this make it hard to convince casual basketball watchers to become regulars at games. Just try to convince someone who hasn't played the game that what is a foul in one place on the court is not a foul 50cm to the left if one player does it, but is a foul in both places if his opponent does. Totally nuts.

Just responding to Peter's point about the no-charge circle giving offensive players the advantage. If the rule is the same as the NBA, the no charge rule does not apply if both players are competing directly under the basket for a put back.

This modification ensures the circle only does what it is intended to do: stop players skying for dunks getting under cut and thereby encouraging athletic plays around the basket.

I think the rule works well in the NBA and so long as our refs are able to call it properly, it should open up things up for athletic slashers, which can only be good for on court action.

I believe it would be even better if they also adopted the NBA's limited zone rule as well, which allows a player to guard an area unless they are inside the key, where they can only stand for 3 secs unless they are guarding someone. This allows for an element of zone and defensive help, without clogging the keyway too much and making it really hard to score on the drive.