Free throw marathon? Whatever. It's a tactic that's been used since the dawn of time and there was absolutely nothing wrong with it. Now you're actually asking referees to make a distinction on whether a player is making a play on the ball or not? It's stupid.

The general punter couldn't give two hoots about how many free throws are taken.

"how can you have different rules in the last minute to the rest of the game."

This is already the case e.g. fouling before the ball has been inbounded is not an USF until the final 2 mins.

And if you honestly think the NBL is going to compete with the AFL and NRL based on changing rules you're kidding yourself.

I missed the game last night. Is there anywhere online I can be pointed towards to see what's being talked about?

Who says fouls at the end is a blight on the game? First I've seen of it. This isn’t the hack a shaq tactics that some teams abuse.

It’s part of the game and creates more opportunities for a tight finish. Try and abolish it and the last couple minutes will be the leading team dribbling in circles for 20seconds and chucking up a shot or until they are fouled regardless from defense getting desperate to get the ball and you end up in the same place.

This emphasis on unsportsmanlike fouls being called on players near the end of a game was always going to cause some issues where teams need to foul to get the opposition on the line as time runs out.

The NBL is our pinnacle, they have to sort it out, but it always comes down to some interpretation. That's where the real issue lies, the quality of the officials to be able to read the state of the game and not influence it unfairly.

This is not going to be an easy fix, now that the rule is the subject of 'point of emphasis'...

"Who says fouls at the end is a blight on the game? First I've seen of it. This isn't the hack a shaq tactics that some teams abuse."

Btown - I've been saying it for years and yes, it does turn off casual followers.

Tactical fouling takes away the speed and athleticism that basketball tries to promote itself with. It makes basketball one of the few games that effectively rewards intentional breaking of the rules instead of punishing it. Casual followers have said the same to me and it's one reason they don't become fans.

In particular, the tv game is usually pretty boring to watch, as a consequence. I suspect that's one reason for Loeliger's recent observation that televised games are really only drawing significant audiences from the cities of the teams playing the game. The game itself is not exciting enough to draw in large numbers of viewers who have no vested interest in the outcome.

"the quality of the officials to be able to read the state of the game and not influence it unfairly"

Shit, people come on her to moan about refs being inconsistent and now other people want them to change how they call the game as the "state of the game" changes. Now that's inconsistency.

"It's part of the game and creates more opportunities for a tight finish."

No, it doesn't. It rarely works as a tactic. Teams average about 1 point per possession in normal game play. If they have a decent 3 point shooter, they might average 1.2 per possession. In foul shooting teams average about 1.4 points per pair of foul shots. A good foul shooter average 1.6 per pair. Even under pressure at the end of a tight game, they average better than 1.2 points per per pair. So the fouling team usually ends up giving away more points than they score themselves.

Get rid of flopping calls while you're at it. Just let them sit on their arse and get scored on if they flop like the old days.

Leave the flopping calls to soccer.

All I know is that I used to enjoy watching the end of a close game but now it's bloody terrible.

From what i have seen in the Japanese league (probably similar to NBL) USF are turning basketball into something akin to football (soccer). Refs are not held to account for USFs called and (more importantly not called), as the calls and interpretations are so subjective. 2 fts plus possession in a close or hard thought game can are like a dodgy PK in a football game.

I'm especially tiring of players gesturing and pressuring/appealing for USFs for anything as if they are Euro footballers. I'd like to see something done about that (techs for excessive appealing) - leave it to the ref to make the decision.

Hey we already have a Melbourne United. Lets get yellow and red cards too.

I'd say the adjustment that players will need to make is that rather than automatically look like he wants to frisk his opponent.. he actually goes for a steal. If he is successful in stealing .. its a bonus because his team now has possession and hasn't had to give away a foul. The team thats just turned it over will now also possibly be a bit more hesistant the next time up the floor.

Team now know that they are going to be fouled down the stretch and thus make sure that the ball is in the hands of reliable FT shooters.... thus why the "foul the team & send them to the line" doesn't work that many times.

Also .... the casual fan ( who can become a rusted on fan if treated right) DOES see the send to the line tactic as less than appealing ( I know .. because I am a basketball convert). Hence the joke about the last 2 mins of games lasting a lifetime.

In theory, SJ - yes. Trouble is in reality, play the ball properly and hard you'll get pinged for unnecessary roughness - bang! USF. Play the ball conservatively/softly and you'll get pinged for not playing the ball/tactical fouling - bang! USF. Seen it too many times this season. Especially with blatantly hometown refs.

I expect this conversation on USF interpretation may continue after the USF's on Barlow and Te Rangi tonight.

I'm not the one creating controversy

Just pointing out that the Teys call was equally correct

The Teys call wasn't correct, he had a legal guarding position a split second before contact was made. Funnily enough, the first contact was made by Hooley's lead arm.

A lot of people talking about how that call is correct under the new rule, but that isn't the case, Teys had fulfilled all the requirements of being in front of the ball handler and establishing a legal guarding position, albeit briefly.

Teys clumsily lunged across his opponent. I'm not sure how that's supposed to be remotely "legal".

Ok. So from what I can gather nobody is really sure what the hell is going on. Everyone has a different take on it. Great rule change....

The intent of the rule IMHO has always been to stop defenders deliberately fouling to stop the flow of the game. They have simply tightened and clarified this.

It's not so much "different rules in the last 2 minutes" as it is recognition that this is when the tactic is most likely to be deployed.

I can recall one game when Trev kept subbing Hire in, purely so he could foul, then subbing him straight out again. It was ugly.

This should also stop the tactic whereby defenders were trying to foul the worst shooter, even when he didn't have possession.

For mine, its simple. Instead of just picking out the worst shooter and wrapping your arms around him, you have to make a proper play for the ball. And hey, maybe you get lucky and get the steal.

I'm with D2.0 and a lot of others on this topic. Make a genuine attempt to steal the ball. If you foul the player, it's a foul, straight up. Free throws, if you're in the bonus, possession if not.

Deliberately foul the player, just to stop the game, when you have no chance of making a steal without fouling and it's unsportsmanlike.

By the way (and I don't often agree with him) PeterJohn is absolutely correct about the likely outcomes of late-game foul fests. They rarely work, anyway. It's ugly basketball, to boot.

So the Teys foul at the end of the game where he was in front of Hooley and reached at the ball while making body contact (because an offensive player is always going to try to keep the ball away from a defender) is always going to be called an unsportsmanlike foul then? From what's happening in the games following that one it's not looking too consistent.

"Fiba have just ruined the game of basketball with this rule change, up 6 with not long left there is no way you can win."

No they haven't. What is being called in the NBL isn't consistent with the rule or with what's being called in other leagues. The issue is with the implementation here, not with the rule.

The only real change in practical terms with late-game fouling is you have to get legal position first. Once you've done that you should be fine if it's called correctly.

That was pretty much my point, that the interpretation needs to by correct!

Last thing we want is officials deciding a game late because they are calling unsportsmanlike, giving the ball back with seconds to go and everyone getting frustrated at them...