The NCAA Men's and Women's Basketball Rules Committees, meeting May 3-6 in Phoenix, recommended procedural adjustments to the game officials' use of courtside television monitors to better clarify last-second shots.

The recommendations would become rules for 2004-05 if approved by the Playing Rules Oversight Panel (PROP) next month. Any recommendations not approved by PROP at that time would be forwarded to the division governing bodies, meaning that the earliest they could become rules would be the 2005-06 season.

The recommendations regarding the use of the monitor are intended to clarify game- and period-ending situations that caused confusion among fans, coaches and media during last season.

The first addresses the proper reference order for judging the release of a last-second shot. For games played with a 10th-of-a-second game clock at which a courtside television monitor is present -- and when officials are required by Rule 2-5.2 to view the monitor after making an initial call on a shot that occurs near the end of a period -- the determining factor as to whether the ball was released before time expired shall be when the game clock shows 0.0, provided that the game clock is visible on the monitor.

When the game clock shows 0.0 before the shot leaves the shooter's hand, the period has ended and the shot shall not count. When the clock is not visible on the monitor, the red or LED light shall be the determining factor, then the sounding of the horn. If definitive information is not available from the monitor, the original ruling that was based on a call using the red or LED lights and then the sounding of the horn shall stand.

The rationale is that using the reading of 0.0 when it is visible on the monitor (which indicates that the game has ended) factors out the time lag that occurs when that reading sends an impulse that triggers the mechanisms in the light and the horn.

The second recommendation addresses the initial call that must be made by officials on last-second shots, which is the final ruling for games at which there is no 10th-of-second game clock or courtside monitor. The recommended clarification is that for game- or period-ending last-second shots, the red light or LED lights (required for Division I but not for Division II or III) shall be used as the indicator for the expiration of playing time. The sounding of the horn shall be used as a backup or when the red or LED lights are not available.

Under another monitor-related recommendation, officials would be permitted to use a courtside television monitor when there is uncertainty as to who should shoot an awarded free throw.

"The committees continue to try to balance limiting interruptions in the game to look at the monitor with ensuring that the correct call is made," said Lynn Hickey, chair of the women's committee and director of athletics at the University of Texas, San Antonio. "The last-second shot is seen by many as the most important shot of the game. In the free-throw situation, the ball is already dead, so minimal time is added to the game."

One other time-related recommendation both committees made attempts to limit timeouts from occurring too close together. Under the recommendation, when a foul is committed that causes a dead ball at one of the specified times for media timeouts, the media timeout shall be taken, then the free throw(s) shall be taken afterward. If the timeout is taken after the free throw(s) and the last free throw is missed, the opportunity for the media timeout is lost until the next dead ball. Currently, the free throw(s) are taken before the media timeout, which may result in media timeouts being used in close proximity of each other.

In other action, the men's committee recommended that the dates for compliance with the Division I men's ring-testing requirements, which were approved by the governance structure last year to become effective in 2004-05, be changed to allow for ease of doing the testing and for betting tracking of compliance. The original dates were listed in the rules book as "once before the season and once before the postseason." Under the recommendation, they would be changed to "once after July 1 and, if postseason games are being held at a site, once after March 1 but before any initial postseason game."

Division I coaches would be required to sign off that preseason testing has been completed and that rings were adjusted accordingly on the form that tracks viewing of the required fall video clinic. Game-management personnel at each school would be required to certify with conference offices that testing has occurred and the rings are in compliance with the rules. Further details about ring testing are available on page 22 of the 2003-04 basketball rules book.

Experimental rules

In a men's committee action that requires no further approval, all certified games (previously known as "exempt" games) that occur before January 1, 2005, will be required to use an experimental free-throw lane that is
1 1/2 feet wider on each side, a three-point line that is extended to 20 feet, 6 inches, and an arc drawn 2 feet from the center of the hoop to assist with charge/block calls.

"We already have experimented with the international trapezoid and the NBA lane," said Willis Wilson, chair of the men's committee and coach at Rice University. "The results of our annual rules survey show a trend of growing support for widening the lane in some fashion. This is a width we have not tried that is a compromise between the two we've tried before.

"This experimental lane also preserves the current 12-foot width at the elbow (free-throw line) by placing a diagonal line from the lane space farthest from the basket to the free-throw line. It may offer the best of both previous experiments while eliminating some of the negatives of each."

Wilson said that the goal of a wider lane is to better spread the floor to reduce rough play near the basket and to allow periphery players easier access on their penetration to the basket. The extension of the three-point line is part of that desire, not an effort to make the shot more difficult.

"Our research from past experimental rules shows that moving back the line does not affect the number of three-point shots taken or the percentage made, but we believe it's a necessity if we widen the lane," Wilson said. "Plus, the survey shows greater support for moving back the line than ever before."

The women's committee did not approve any experimental rules for the coming season. Last season, the women's committee recommended a rules change for moving back the three-point line to 20 feet, 6 inches, the same recommendation as the men's committee. The men's committee last season recommended moving back the three-point line and instituting a trapezoid free-throw lane, but those recommendations were not approved by the NCAA governance structure.

"Our committee is not in favor of moving back the three-point line at this time," Hickey said. "But we also recognize that the men's game needs to explore ways to improve play and that the best way to do that may be for them to change court markings. We support that, but we believe that if and when that happens, we don't necessarily need to change the women's markings at the same time. We might do so later on, when our game is ready, much as we did with the three-point line.

"People need to remember that our game is much younger than the men's -- we only started playing five-on-five in 1969-70, so even though we play essentially the same game we are at different points in our history and have different needs."

Wilson said the men's committee supported the women's position.

"It's good for our rules to be the same in many cases, but we support the women's desire to maintain current differences or create new ones where they think it's important," he said.

An independent part of the men's experiment is a temporary charge/block restraining arc being drawn under the basket for the certified games.

This experiment answers a common request of coaches and officials who have expressed the need for a more identifiable reference point to assist officials in making this difficult judgment when defenders attempt to establish guarding position under the basket for the purpose of drawing an offensive foul. With the experimental arc, an offensive player should not be charged with an offensive foul when a defensive player has established position with one foot inside the restraining arc near the basket unless the defensive player is making a legitimate attempt to play defense and not attempting to draw a charge.

These experimental rules also could be used in exhibition games occurring before January 1, 2005, by schools in any division. The committee encourages schools in all divisions to use these experimental court markings for as many games as possible, especially in Divisions II and III, since they have few games in which their use is required.

"We would like to get feedback on these experiments from as many schools as possible," Wilson said. "In the past we've received very little input from Divisions II and III and from Division I teams that do not play in certified games. The rules are common for all divisions, so for us to get good information from which to judge whether to make a change, we need to hear from all divisions."

Wilson's term as chair will end September 1. The men's committee elected University of Detroit Mercy coach Perry Watson as its new chair. Hickey will return as women's chair for a third year.

Other highlights

Men's and Women's Basketball Rules Committees
May 3-6/Phoenix

In addition to the recommended rules changes described in the accompanying article, the NCAA Men's and Women's Basketball Rules Committees also determined points of emphasis for the 2004-05 season.

Women's points of emphasis

Displacement. This remains a point of emphasis from last season. The areas in which the committee seeks greater enforcement of displacement as a foul include hand-checking, post play, screening, cutting and rebounding.

Principle of verticality. The committee noted that this rule needs to be enforced more closely with the way it appears in the rules book.

Men's points of emphasis

Bench decorum. Acceptable forms of behavior for coaches and other bench personnel is again a point of emphasis, with particular attention to the use of profanity. The committee noted that bench decorum during the regular season was generally improved but deteriorated during the postseason.

Hanging on the ring. Players should not be permitted to hang on the basket ring in an excessive or emphatic manner during dunks when there is no possibility of a resulting injury occurring to that player or others.

Palming or carrying the ball. This violation places the defender at a distinct disadvantage and gives the dribbler a sizable advantage, which is not within the spirit and intent of the rules and shall be enforced when there is an advantage gained.

Rough play. The committee seeks stricter enforcement of rough play and illegal contact, specifically in offensive and defensive low-post play with and without the ball, and hand-checking and body checking.