Players should have to wear a scarlet F on their uniforms

[Sid the Squid]

After they're caught floping 5 times in one season...All they have to do is review every game, which the refs do already.

This idea was brought to you by JVG..I hate watching his teams, but that guy is fun to listen to.

I love the idea..At least there should be a 1 game suspension after a certain number of flops.

[Sleepy51]

Van Gundy is a special broadcast talent.

[Sleepy51]

And I totally agree about the flopping problem.

There's a couple of rules changes I would like to see next year.

#1 call the moving screen consistently.

#2 call a flop as a technical foul. In soccer flopping makes sense because the ref can't see contact from 300 yards away. In basketball the flop is unsporting conduct, it's an attempt to deceive the ref and is analogous to cheating. Flops should count towards the two tech ejection rule. Shut that crap down.

#3 lower the foul limit back down to 5 fouls. 6 fouls is stupid and just encourages bad play. The refs shouldn't be calling ticktacky crap or giving makeup calls anyway. There's no reason any individual player should be impeding play (which is what a foul is) more than once a quarter. If you take two fouls in a quarter, you should be in foul trouble.

#4 (conditional) I don't to bail Shaq out on the crappy foul shooting, but I hate the fact that intentional fouls are even allowed. I think ANY intentional foul as determined by the refs should be a tech. 1 shot and the ball. Taking an intentional foul should have significant consequences.. This should affet fouling to stop the clock, or to stop a fast break, or any reason. I am willing to withold this rule until Shaq retires so that he doesn't get off the hook for not making FT's, but intentional fouling needs to go away.

[Sleepy51]

Refs should also have a "red card" power. The refs should be able to suspend someone for a future game on the spot for unsporting conduct of any kind. I realize Joey Crawford would have summarily executed Duncan for clapping, but I'll live with that risk. The refs need to have real control of the game, a suspension power would serve as a giagantic deterrent to bad behavior on the court.

[Sid the Squid]

I like the idea of calling the flops during the game reviews..It's too hard to do with the naked eye.

[Sleepy51]

I like the idea of calling the flops during the game reviews..It's too hard to do with the naked eye.

I don't have a problem wth ADDITIONAL flops being called upon review, but I definitely want the refs empowered to tell a guy "knock that s off"

The fact that they can get the call wrong adds the element of unpredictability that forces people to err on the side of self policing. If guys know that playing like a wuss at all runs the risk of getting you ejected, they won't come close to playing like wusses.

[GSW2K4]

I like the idea of calling the flops during the game reviews..It's too hard to do with the naked eye.

Agreed.

After the game, pick out flops, and add it to the points players pick up for technicals. That way the players that do this every game will get penalized with suspensions.

Vlade Divac would have been suspended after 2-3 games.

In fact, big men who flop should get double the points...

If that doesn't solve the problem they just continue to get suspended.

[GSW2K4]

Refs should also have a "red card" power. The refs should be able to suspend someone for a future game on the spot for unsporting conduct of any kind. I realize Joey Crawford would have summarily executed Duncan for clapping, but I'll live with that risk. The refs need to have real control of the game, a suspension power would serve as a giagantic deterrent to bad behavior on the court.

I like this idea -- as long as it's more of a situation where a ref can nominate a player for suspension and then the player gets the opportunity to appeal.

This system would be perfect for hack-a-shaq offenders. Maybe even penalizing teams who employ that as a strategy. Because resorting to that isn't even really playing basketball after a certain point.

But otherwise, there's very few examples I can think of where a ref wasn't given enough power to eject.

Marvin Williams was tossed without any problem. Most other plays I could think of are calls that the refs missed rather than lacking the power punish severely enough.

[Sleepy51]

-= original quote snipped =-



I like this idea -- as long as it's more of a situation where a ref can nominate a player for suspension and then the player gets the opportunity to appeal.

This system would be perfect for hack-a-shaq offenders. Maybe even penalizing teams who employ that as a strategy. Because resorting to that isn't even really playing basketball after a certain point.

But otherwise, there's very few examples I can think of where a ref wasn't given enough power to eject.

Marvin Williams was tossed without any problem. Most other plays I could think of are calls that the refs missed rather than lacking the power punish severely enough.

No nomination, no appeal. That's the problem with this effin country today. Everything is a damn plea bargain. People don't police them selves when they can calculate the consequences. As long as there's an appeal some are going to think it's worth the risk. If the ref can just make the call there and then, the unpredicatablitly of personalities like Crawford or Violet . . . ok, maybe we don't let the broad have that power, at least not during PMS, of course they should know her cycle and shouldn't be assigning thunderhips games when she's on the rag (yeah ladies, I just said all that :p ) . . . the unpredictablitly is what makes the deterrent work. When you know you could get screwed by wandering into the grey area, you give it a wide berth. I pegged my cruise control at 54 when I drove through Alabama.

Ejections is fine. They have that power, but I'm talking about issuing a subsequent suspension immediately for unsporting conduct. Where and when the violation happened.

Of with their heads!

[Sid the Squid]

I just took my neighbor to small claims court..I won , but the judge only awarded me 1,000 of the 1,600 I had asked for...Then my neighbor appealed the ruling , so we had to go 3 months later to small claims appeal court...That judge just ruled yesterday..She awarded me the whole 1,600..Ive been walking around with this goofy grin on my face for the last 36 hours...

[Sleepy51]

I just took my neighbor to small claims court..I won , but the judge only awarded me 1,000 of the 1,600 I had asked for...Then my neighbor appealed the ruling , so we had to go 3 months later to small claims appeal court...That judge just ruled yesterday..She awarded me the whole 1,600..Ive been walking around with this goofy grin on my face for the last 36 hours...

That's pretty sweet, but how much more awesome would it have been if you lived in Texas and could just shoot your neighbor in the face right there on the spot as long as you dragged his body back onto your property?

Unpredictablility is what life is all about.

[GSW2K4]

lol you're hilarious

[GSWbandwagon]

just curious, how would a flop be defined? i'm assuming falling down when no contact has occured counts and that yanking someone into you and then falling counts (though the yank is a foul in the first place). but what about "selling" a foul when there is some contact and a player goes flying like he's been hit with a cannon ball?

[Sleepy51]

In my ideal situation, it doesn't need to be defined. It's a tech for unsportsmanlike, demonstrative, disruptive behavior. It doesn't require any new rule, it just requires that the refs "know it when they see it."

The fact is, "selling" a foul is against the spirit of the game. Players should put up resistance to contact and focus on finishing plays in case the ref doesn't blow a whistle. They shouldn't be abandoning the focus of the game and acting out to try and lobby for calls. The refs just need to be instructed to start calling flops for what they are, disruptions to the game and unsportsmanlike behavior. By not specifically defining it, and leaving the refs ultimate discretion for a "sportsmanship" issue, it reinforces the appropriate control relationship with the refs in charge of the game and it puts players in a situation where their best course of action is to err on the side of sportsmanship and caution vs. trying to find and push the boundaries.

Eff em. Off with their heads.

[TB]

I think the best way to address the flop rule would be to not categorize it as something else, meaning a foul or a technical. If the ref decides its a flop, the other team is rewarded with a FT, just like a tech. Yet, like a defensive 3 second, it doesnt count as a personal foul or technical.

Refs would be very hesitant to call a flop if they knew it counted towards an ejection due to it counting as a technical. Yet, if it just caused a FT, players would stop flopping some because they wouldnt want to lose points for their team, and they wouldnt want to add to their tally of flops, which would lead to them being considered a major flopper.

My idea is the most logical step in the fight against flopping. Its very similar to what soccer refs do. If they think a player flops, they dont reward a penalty, and if its a bad flop, they will even issue a yellow card.

TB for commish.

[TB]

i like all of sleepy's ideas, except for the red card one. I refuse to give refs that power. Let the league watch film to determine suspensions. Its not a great policy, but its better than just the refs split second choice.

to add to my flop rule, it would not be disputable after the game. If the ref awards a team a FT from a flop, its final, just like a 3 second call.

[FNQ]

Flopping should be its own punishment... if someone's a notorious flopper, maybe they dont get as many good calls for them anymore... only extremely clear fouls.

Otherwise, just let the play go... if the flopping occurs and affects the movement of the game (say flopping in front of someone who has the ball) then they could call a delay tech... otherwise my ideal situation is to just have the refs ignore the worst offenders until they realize its negatively affecting their fouls being called.

[TB]

^ hoping ref's start to "figure it out" is eerily similar to hoping baron "starts to figure out shot selection and lazy D".

come on Reggae, wheres the Do Something About it Mentality?

[GSWbandwagon]

Flopping should be its own punishment... if someone's a notorious flopper, maybe they dont get as many good calls for them anymore... only extremely clear fouls.

Otherwise, just let the play go... if the flopping occurs and affects the movement of the game (say flopping in front of someone who has the ball) then they could call a delay tech... otherwise my ideal situation is to just have the refs ignore the worst offenders until they realize its negatively affecting their fouls being called.

i don't like reputation calls in either direction.

how does flopping defensively cause a delay of game? if a defender falls down, its his (and his team's) problem.

the problems i have with giving refs more discretion are that their job is subjective enough as is and that they clearly don't know what a flop is currently. if they'd just stop calling flops fouls then players would stop flopping. without the call, flopping puts the flopper and his team at a disadvantage.

[FNQ]

Not hoping the refs figure it out... more like hope they are told to ignore it.

Flopping defensively, like say Wright backs down Nene, and Nene throws himself backwards when Wright starts moving forwards, causing Wright to fall or causing a pileup... Delay.

I mean if I were a ref, I'd make damn sure someone fouled Fisher before I blew my whistle... and if I was to miss a foul because I didn't see it clearly enough... tough **** for Fish.