the 1-and-1 rule

I mentioned this in a rule change thread a long time ago but lets discuss it in detail.

I've always been an advocate of the 1-and-1 freethrow rule. It rewards good freethrow shooting (even more so), and in my opinion, is very fair compared to the current rules. I just despise the current system. It's ridiculous to me how a guy fouled in a non-shooting situation (i.e. loose ball foul) can get guarenteed 2 freethrows?or when a guy gets called for hand-checking 30 feet from the basket...there is no intention of shooting, he didn?t have to work for those freethrows yet he gets rewarded with 2.

What do you guys think?

 

I completely agree with you, I love the rule. I don't know why they ever decided to do away with it. It would be a great way to improve free throw shooting as well as the flow of the game.

 

I never got much of the rule.

Is it that a player will take a second free throw only if he makes the first one?

 

Yeah, make the first - get a chance at the second.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting franchise3:</div><div class="quote_post">I never got much of the rule.

Is it that a player will take a second free throw only if he makes the first one?</div>


On shooting fouls, you get two freethrows like normal...but on non-shooting fouls during penalty situation, you have to make the first to get the second.

 

Oh thanks guys, in that case I believe that the rule could make the end of games more exciting when one team is down by one. This could greatly improve the number of buzzer beaters.

 

Yeah I like that rule although me myself and i would never make that first free throw not during CRUNCH time anyway

 

come on, no other opinions?

 

I love that rule. If it wasn't for that, the opposing team could just keep fouling and fouling, and it will not take effect on the score. The 1-on-1 rule gives you a chance to make a free throw, and you do have to put some work into it in a way. Becuase of you make the first, your rewarded of another free throw, simple reason why the rule was put in.

 

I love that rule. Although we'll be seeing a lot og hack a shaq with that rule.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting InNETSweTrust:</div><div class="quote_post">I love that rule. Although we'll be seeing a lot og hack a shaq with that rule.</div>

Yeah, I agree. Teams would foul bad free-throw shooters in chrunch time... It would slow the pace at the end of the game I think... Tell me if I'm wrong,but any coach would love that rule if they have to play against Big Ben, Shaq, Chris Webber etc...

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting ThaLord:</div><div class="quote_post"> It would slow the pace at the end of the game I think... ...</div>

ACtually, it would quicken the pace overall. We would only have to watch Shaq clank his freethrow once instead of twice

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting notMuchgame:</div><div class="quote_post">ACtually, it would quicken the pace overall. We would only have to watch Shaq clank his freethrow once instead of twice </div>


But think about the time that the stoppage will take. People will foul him at the other end of the court and everyone has to walk to the FT line. This will happen almost every single time during crunch time.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting InNETSweTrust:</div><div class="quote_post">But think about the time that the stoppage will take. People will foul him at the other end of the court and everyone has to walk to the FT line. This will happen almost every single time during crunch time.</div>

No, you're talking about an off-the-ball intentional foul. According to the rule (in college bball), they would get a freethrow and the ball.

The 1-and-1 rule has been implimented in the NCAA for years now and their games don't end any slower than an NBA game. If anything, they end more exciting because the freethrows are more pressured. The team down always has a chance.

Besides, if shaq keeps getting fouled (which happens anyways), that's his own fault for not being able to hit the easiest shot in basketball. Why must we protect guys like that for?

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting notMuchgame:</div><div class="quote_post">On shooting fouls, you get two freethrows like normal...but on non-shooting fouls during penalty situation, you have to make the first to get the second.</div>

Wow, I never knew that. :thumbsup:

 

I think that it's a great rule. They need to bring it back.

 

The one-and-one rule in college is only from the 7th team foul to the 9th on non shooting situations. Once a team gets their 10th team foul, the other team gets two shots the rest of the time.

You shouldn't be hand checking a guy 30 feet from the basket anyway. If you make 1 and 1 situations, you are just promoting bad defense.

I don't see where there is anything wrong with getting two shots once the team is over the limit, so why change it?

 

I think is a good rule..it will make players to practice more free throw shooting..i just cant stand guys getting paid millions of dollars and miss free throws..I mean anybody can miss free throws..but for example when TD missed 9 in a row???? wat in the hell is that..shaq should make 1/2 if he works hard on practice..

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting redscoon:</div><div class="quote_post">
You shouldn't be hand checking a guy 30 feet from the basket anyway. If you make 1 and 1 situations, you are just promoting bad defense.

</div>

Hand-check fouls and loose ball fouls are part of the game. I don't know how you can relate that to bad defense. Michael Jordan use to hand check all the time.

 

How is getting called for hand checking 30 feet from the basket not bad defense?

Michael Jordan also was addicted to gambling, cheated on his wife, and struck a teammate in the face during a practice, that doesn't make those things right.