RealGM

Stern wants to modify the basket interference rule to one modeled after the International game, which dictates that the ball is live as soon as it touches the rim. The commish seems to be downplaying the possible impact on the game, but this would be a huge change. Players could take a ball off the rim when its ready to fall in, or hammer one down when the ball is poised to roll out.

In this scenario, a player with great length, massive hops, anticipation, and who is quick off his feet could really be an asset. I could see Evans grabbing all kinds of boards off the rim as well as making rebound dunks. AK and Favors as well. Possible draftees Valanciunas, Vesely or Biyombo would also benefit from the change. Al Jefferson would have to redouble his boxing out efforts, though.

I would like to see it happen, and hope the Jazz continue to add length and athleticism. Makes for exciting ball.

disagree. that rule is for playgrounds. the game called "tip-in."

stern wants to change it because it is too hard on the refs to make the right call. he wants his players (the referees) to be infallible. we've all seen the rule changes this year that make it against the rules to disagree with a call during a game. it looks ridiculous. and the players and coaches get slapped with huge fines if they talk about referee's with human qualities (ie. making mistakes.)

the change he should be doing is acknowledging that refs make mistakes and make it easier for them to call a fair game. instant replay, fair criticism, among other things. changing the rules for the refs benefit will only open the door for more criticism and less trust in the league.

I've always been in favor of the rule change personally, gives an edge to defense, and increases the game play above the rim which is where the game is most exciting.

I've been hoping for this rule to get into the NBA, but I don't think it will ever make it. The game has changed to help guards, this could even it out for the bigs. Still, I don't see it happening.

It won't make refereeing any easier. They'll have to review whether a 3-point attempt went in on its own or with assistance from an offensive player.

You're going to have plays like you had in the old days where big men would turn their hands into additional "backboards" to guide shots into the hoop. Personally I think it's a bad idea, and there's a reason that rule was implemented in the first place.

I'd rather see spectacular alley-oops and follow-up dunks than the mess at the rim this rule would bring.

This rule would benefit the Lakers more than any other team, and the officials the most overall - as meestr suggested. Yeah it could b fun sometimes, but interference doesn't happen often enogh to slow the game down when there needs to be a replay. I think the NBA as a whole suffers from Stern's totalitarian reign. There needs to be more transparency if he ever wants all the conspiracy theories and criticism to end...insteasports and entertainment industries suffer from the tight grip bosses like Stern force upon every aspect of business

I like it in international play, it's a sound rule that would speed up the game a bit, result in some exciting and frustrating plays but contribute to the overall quality that we see on the floor and help emphasize boxing out as a necessary skill.

The funny thing is, goal tending calls are about the least of the problems with NBA officiating. A change would speed things up, however, and shift a bit of emphasis back to the bigs, which needs very much to happen. The game in its current state is unbalanced if favor of iso guards.

Stern adds nothing but class to the league every single year.

Personally I feel like the rule change would be horrible. One of the reasons why the NBA game is so exciting is because of the high scoring and offense. They might as well throw out defensive three seconds too while they're at it. It would kill the offense. Could you imagine Dwight Howard with this rule? He would average 6-8 more rebounds and prevent double digits worth of points on his own from pulling balls off the rim.

To me, it's just not basketball. It's never been a big problem, I can't understand why Stern is so concerned about it. It's a worse idea than changing the type of ball they play with...just idiotic.

I love it. Probably my favorite part of watching the international competitions. Gives an advantage to athletic bigs around the hoop, and eliminates the constant question of "was it in the cylinder/wasn't it?" Love the idea and hope it happens.

I like the rule. It reward skill on the shooter's part. If you can put the ball right in there is no change. If you are just throwing it up on the rim and hoping the defense should be able hit it out.

What happens if the shooter is fouled and throws a shot up- it sits on the rim and is slammed in. Does the shooter get 1 or 2 free throws.

I like it.

This is a horrible rule. and i think takes away from the intergrity of the game. if a player shoots the ball and it goes in , it goes in, if it doesn't, rebound the ball and put it back like a man. if you can't put it back because its not on the rim, then your weak a@# post player. All you'll need now is the biggest player by the rim , wit no skill just waiting for shots to tip in. and the game is more exciting above the rim, but its the events that lead up to it. everyone seen a dunk, or a huge block shot, but its the cross over or pass that sets it up. Basketball is above and below the rim.