Time for some linky for all the lazy ones ;)

http://linky.com.au/2akwq

Yol, thank you DJ

I see the article refers to FIBA rules, and following them.
My understanding was that FIBA has changed the key, but the court has been resurfaced at the dome with the old key.
Is this change not happening at international level of are we varying NBL courts?

"The summit agreed that NBL games would be called tighter by the referees with particular focus on illegal use of the hands against players with and without the ball and that any hand contact against the ball handler should be an immediate foul."

Thank God for that. I know they figured that less calls would mean a free-flowing game, but it actually had a negative effect. Seeing a ball handler being abused in the backcourt while retaining his dribble, which leads to less time to run an offence, makes the game a poor spectacle.

Yeah I saw that poll on the NBL website asking people what the refs should crack down on. I voted for "Holding off the ball". You're welcome Luke Schenscher.

Good thing Goorj is out of the league!

Read this earlier today. Stacker in that roel should be interesting...how long can he hold his tongue for?

I had no problem with the reffing on-ball last year, I thought that brought us in line with the rest of the world at last, but far too much of the off-the-ball stuff was allowed because it didn't disadvantage the team because the ball was passed elsewhere. Of course, often it was passed elsewhere because the guy being held couldn’t get clear due to being held!

I worry about 'zero tolerance on travels’ and ‘no advantage or disadvantage’, could make for some long nights.

Blitz Grand Final had 48 fouls called

It's his job to question the refs. Goorj was the master of it and look how he turned out.

Zero tolerance on travels, and deleting advantage calls gets my vote.
This should make it more technically correct, and take us away from that Awful Americanism of slam dunking being made the most important part of the game.
I'm not sure about 40min. games and 5 fouls though, esp. if all hand checking fouls are called.

They are not deleting the advantage/disadvantage rule.

Coaches hate the line "I played the advantage", it gets their blood boiling. Hence a request not to answer with that phrase.

Unfortunately in Darwin, this meeting took place, Stacker and Pat. Pat passed on the points to three refs on our game, and Scotty walked away with a T. Later to be told the new way.

Lets face it Scotty can get in your ear, but he normally refrains from over the top gesturing.

FM, the below para is what makes me think there will be a lot fewer advantage calls - which are a gresat thing if officiated properly:

"The summit agreed that NBL games would be called tighter by the referees with particular focus on illegal use of the hands against players with and without the ball and that any hand contact against the ball handler should be an immediate foul."

I get so sick of a hand check being called after a player has already blown by the defender.

I get sick of hand checks not being called just because the ball carrier doesn't turn it over. If you don't like seeing hand checks after a defender has been beaten, you need to hope the defender learns to keep his hands to himself.

Anonomous, if you think that's how its called overseas you my friend have you head up your .......

Handchecking is key internationally in Europe. Its in the block they are allowed to kill each other to a certain degree.

TC, calling a hand check after the ball handler has gone past his defender disadvantages the ballhandler and the crowd/viewers - it is poor refereeing.

I agree, hand checks (or any foul) should not be overlooked just because they don't cause a turnover, and that’s where the advantage rule was poorly implemented last year, but that doesn’t mean get rid of it, just refine that way it is used.

I don’t mind them calling it tighter, as long as they don’t go back to how it was until a couple of seasons ago where pretty much any contact was called a foul, regardless of whether the defensive player had position or not, or has jumped straight up.

That saw bad offensive plays continually bailed out by the refs, and I think this is what Anonymous is talking about.

Paul - having a no call after an offensive p[layer has negotiated his way past a reaching in defender might disadvantage the offense on that specific play as the D can then reset but surely letting the violation go uncalled will disadvantage them in the long run as the defender hasnt used up one of his fouls and can do the same thing on the next play?

I personally like to see the game called a bit tighter than it has been when guards are bringing up the ball. Sure it might slow the game down in the first few minutes but Im sure the defenders will adjust pretty fast when they see their foul tally going up and the game then will flow better.

I guess the main thing though is having consistancy across the board - and this I feel has been the main downfall of our refs in recent times.

Statman, I disagree because when fouls that don't affect the play are called it puts players from both sides in foul trouble, reduces the flow of the game for both players and spectators.

If you look at boxscores from really good games they rarely have high foul counts, and this allows the game to develop and be a really good spectacle.

I don’t think NBL referees are as bad as anon says. They used to be but they are now much better at not 'guess calling’ just because there was contact. But we cant afford to go back to making it almost impossible to play the defence that is accepted as normal in most parts of the world.

Assuming the refs are being consistant and not guessing (yes its a massive assumption) wouldnt a high foul count be more due to the players not adjusting their play to the tighter reffing rather than refs being overzealous? If you set the tone for the game early the playesr know where the boundaries are and will play accordingly. If a guard picks up 3 fouls in the first 1/4 for reaching in and bodying the player bringing the ball up surely they will be forced to move their feet more and reach less when they get back on the court. If not they will foul out.

As for good games having low foul counts - Ill agree with you there, but, does the low foul count indicate the refs let a lot of softer stuff go, or were the players just playing good legal defense without the hand and body checking?

Anonymous on your first comment regarding games internationally, if you think that about me and my experiences then good luck to you but i assure you your thoughts are incorrect. Dont let the name Sebastian fool you.

Internationally and in euroleague any overt contact on the ball carrier is now called with greater regularity than in the past. That's how FIBA educate their referees these days. Prior to all major tournaments they conduct clinics so that all officials are on the same page especially as they generally have officilas from weaker zones within the refereeing group. Never judge refereeing standards at a tournament by the preliminary rounds due to this fact. Your best indicator at an Olympics or worlds at any level or age group is in the second round. You draw your conclusions about referee standards from there as this is when the best referees are doing the games. They allow the game to flow from the quarters on and the game is run by advantage/disadvantage. Simple as that.

The language barrier is why the game is called tighter internationally because you cant communicate as well so referees dont talk they just blow. Players dont respond to preventative officiating as they use the language barrier as the excuse for not conforming. But if they get a call they dont like, they soon remember how to speak english.

Totally agree that the reason coaches and players get the sh*ts in Australia but anywhere for that matter is the lack of consistency from call to call and game to game. This is the main improvement the NBL panel must strive for now and in the future. The main problem is the difference in ability from referees ranked in the top 4 to the referees ranked in the bottom 4 is massive. This gap needs to decrease significantly for things to improve. As you say in the last 6 or 7 years Australian referees have ranked and performed exceptionally well on the international stage for such a small country in basketball terms especially.

Yes our refs in my opinion are smart enough to decide advantage/dis but the NBL coaches dont agree and feel that the group as a whole doesnt have the knowledge or experience to do this consistently thus they just want the crap blown out of it. No adv/dis, a defender puts his hand in regardless of outcome and its is a foul. Plain and simple as that. They say players will adjust. Whether you agree with it or not, that's how they want it called.

Blowing the game tighter this season has nothing to do with making the game more free flowing. Coaches say they just dont know what is a foul and what isnt due to adv/dis so to remove their frustrations they just want to take adv/dis out of the decision making process and just call everything. It will be a sh*t spectacle trust me but that's what the directive is this season.

If you watched the AFL press conference yesterday the best thing that the 3 guys said was their role is to let them play football. Simple as that. The same could and should be said about basketball.

One of the problems i think will occur is referees will second guess themselves more than ever. They have been so used to holding their whistles and trying to let the play develop that this season i think they will get caught between the 2 styles. They will go is that a foul, sh*t im not sure, oh but no adv so play on but wait it has to be a foul now and i think you will find the inconsistencies will increase not decrease. You cant move to full FIBA basketball and full FIBA rules and then take out the major principle of the international game "advantage /disadvantage" and expect there not to be problems.

I look forward to watching the season opener tomorrow night to see how they call the game. Especially with 1 Aussie ref and 2 New Zealanders on the game.

The refs at Breakers games have always called it very tight anyway so I am not sure it will be a good indicator for games played in Australia.

Statman, sure players can adjust to the refereeing calls, but if that adjustments means they cant play aggressive defence as it is played in most parts of the world, then that is a bad thing. Having said that, it is interesting to hear from NBL coaches who have coached under Euro refs, they prefer Aussie refs, and I do too in a lot of respects, especially now that they rarely bail out offensive players who jump into the defensive players chests.

But the big thing for me is that coaches should not have a huge say on how the game is called. They want everything blown because it is less frustrating for them. If you call every foul by the rule book, the people in the stands and watching on tv are going to be bored by a foul fest and wont watch too many more games.

Correct Paul. The games will be in the bonus 4 mins into each quarter and nobody wants to watch a free thorw shooting contest

Watching Bruce getting banged into while Schenscher was getting held onto and pushed around wasn't enjoyable. The game IS actually more free flowing when called correctly and the guards back off a bit from fouling.

'Getting banged into' - in a lot of cases he was running into the defenders chest ie they beat him to the spot.

Call the force if that happens - I don't think they called a lot. Refs calling it differently, some games they almost lost control.

Paul - "If you call every foul by the rule book, the people in the stands and watching on tv are going to be bored by a foul fest and wont watch too many more games"

I see it differently. I think that by letting stuff go to the point where the game becomes overly physical (particularly for ball handlers) detracts from the game and is a turn off for spectators. I'd rather see a PG advance the ball quickly over half court and get in to his offence than seeing him getting smashed until 4 seconds remain on the shot clock. There can still be good D played, in particular good team D, but allowing guys to grapple and hold does not make them good defenders, and it's worse when one team is allowed to do it, but on the other side of the country the refs call it differently.

I am not about letting the gae be 'overly physical', I am about allowing players to play defence. If a ballhandler cant get around a defender then he cant advance the ball quickly. I hope the days are gone when referees in this country automatically call a foul on the defender when there is contact, regardless of whether he had position or not.

I don't think that has been the case for some time. But the whole "let it go unless there is a turnover" way of calling things has had an adverse effect on the games. If the choice is there between less whistle/scrappy game, or more whistle/better skills then i'll take option B.