What is this new rule all about?

[LakeShow]

Breakaway fouls are now 2 shots and the ball. What is that all about? Are we assuming that a player on a breakaway would stop for a three pointer and get fouled why we now give the players the ball back? Does this rule include the front and backcourt? If it's anywhere on the court, if a player fouls someone from behind now does that give them 2 shots and the ball. Let's say a player breaks free on a backdoor and someone comes from behind him and fouls him, isn't that the same thing? He had a clear path to the basket. Does that player get 2 shots and the ball out?

[Mr.Bottomtooth]

I never understood that either.

[MrChug]

Most rule changes since 99' have been mainly geared toward speeding up the game. The post-Bulls era's successful teams have based their schemes on a "defense first" mentality. Little changes here and there. Like scrapping the "reset the shot clock after a kick ball", upping the penalty to 2 shots and the ball after an intentional foul with less than 2 minutes to go (a.k.a, "The Hack-A-Shaq/Bruce/Ben Rule"). This is no different. The league LIKES breakaways and wants to discourage the stoppage of that excitement as much as possible. Hence the rediculous penalty for doing it.

[Kori Ellis]

Here's more about it from an article on ESPN.com last February

The NBA's compe ion committee approved five small rules changes that will take effect in the 2006-07 season if approved by the league's Board of Governors, ESPN.com learned Friday.

The most notable change would be to the so-called "clear path rule," covering situations in which a player is intentionally fouled to prevent a breakaway. The team being fouled would get two shots and the ball under the proposed change. Currently, the penalty is one shot and the ball.

The other changes approved by the league's compe ion committee, made up of one representative from each of the 30 teams, are as follows:

• When a player on the receiving end of a punching, elbowing or flagrant category two foul is unable to attempt his foul shots, one of the four teammates who were on the court when the foul happened would be able to take the free throws in his place. Under current rules, the team that committed the foul can choose any player on the opposing team -- even someone on the bench -- to shoot the free throws.

• Players who are not lined up along the lane would be prohibited from standing anywhere beneath the foul line extended when free throws are being shot. This would end the practice of a player dashing in from the corner to try to tip in a missed free throw.

• In an effort to improve the flow of the game, referees would be permitted to let play continue when a defending team gained possession of the ball a split-second after the shot clock expires. Under current rules, if the buzzer sounds when a shot is in mid-air and the ball misses the rim, the referees are required to stop play and award the ball out of bounds on the sideline.

• Unlimited subs utions would be allowed during all 20-second timeouts. Currently, they are allowed only during the final two minutes of each half.

The Board of Governors will vote on the proposed changes in April.

The "clear path" rule would be tweaked because statistics showed teams are averaging less than 2 points when clear path fouls are called.

"The original idea behind the clear path foul was we didn't want them to occur. But now, when they do occur, the offended team is not getting the yield point-wise that they should be," NBA vice president Stu Jackson told ESPN.com.

The committee turned down a proposal to move the markings along the foul lane, would would have allowed the non-shooting team's players to line up a few inches closer to the shooter when free throws were about to be attempted.

"We're going to continue to evaluate that one. There's a feeling that maybe it's getting more difficult to secure a rebound as the non-shooting team on a missed free throw, with buys getting pushed under [the basket]," Jackson said. "We didn't pass that one, but we're looking at it."

[LakeShow]

Thanks Kori!

Oh great,..another tool for an official to dictate momentum or outcome of a game. I would hate to see Steve Javie being the one to determine if a clear path violation was "INTENTIONAL OR NOT". Teams would have the opportunity to score as much as 6 points (2 freethrows, 3 pointer and a foul) on one infraction. That's just too much.

Aside from that, I had to look up how the NBA defines a Clear Path foul. I must say I was shocked in what I read,

Clear-Path-To-The-Basket Fouls
A clear-path-to-the-basket foul is called if a personal foul occurs (1) when the ball and an offensive player are positioned between the tip-of-circle extended in the backcourt and the basket in the frontcourt, with no defender between the ball and the basket, (2) the possession originates in the backcourt, including throw-ins, and (3) the foul deprives the offensive team of an opportunity to score.

Ok, now we want to take hustling out the game. I remember Tayshawn Prince running down Reggie Miller on a breakaway and making one of the greatest recovery and block shots ever. Great, Great play. It would be foolish for players to risk making a play like that in today's NBA. Just let him score the 2.

The NBA is getting ridiculous with these rules. Why not let a foul be a foul. Screw the intentional or not? Clear Path=2 freethrows? I would even be in agreement with going old school and give the player 3 to make 2 freethrows.

[LakeShow]

Another thought, what if it was ruled an Intentional Clear Path Foul and the ball went in? Does that mean the basket counts, 2 free throws and the ball? That's 8 points possible now.

[FlipMavFan]

Another one of Sterns genius in the making.

[Marklar MM]

Clear-Path-To-The-Basket Fouls
A clear-path-to-the-basket foul is called if a personal foul occurs (1) when the ball and an offensive player are positioned between the tip-of-circle extended in the backcourt and the basket in the frontcourt, with no defender between the ball and the basket, (2) the possession originates in the backcourt, including throw-ins, and (3) the foul deprives the offensive team of an opportunity to score.

Ok, now we want to take hustling out the game. I remember Tayshawn Prince running down Reggie Miller on a breakaway and making one of the greatest recovery and block shots ever. Great, Great play. It would be foolish for players to risk making a play like that in today's NBA. Just let him score the 2.

You can still do that as it would not be called clear path if you foul him on the layup or jumpshot. The foul is called if you intentionally foul behind the play or grab the guys jersey or something when they have a clear path.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

It's clearly aimed at entertainment value - people like breakaway dunks, smart foulers take them away, so let's heavily penalise anyone who tries to take the fun of a breakaway dunk out of the game.

Makes sense to me. Fouling a guy on the breakaway is cheap and not really in the spirit of the game anyway.

[LakeShow]

It's clearly aimed at entertainment value - people like breakaway dunks, smart foulers take them away, so let's heavily penalise anyone who tries to take the fun of a breakaway dunk out of the game.

Makes sense to me. Fouling a guy on the breakaway is cheap and not really in the spirit of the game anyway.

I think the NBA has enough dunks and breakaways in the game without trying to ensure more. Alot of those fouls are reaction fouls when they reach and grab. When it was first called it was Kobe being fouled by Billups after kobe had knocked the ball toward backcourt, Billups reacted and grabbed Kobe on the arm slightly. Kobe didn't even have control of the ball although he appeared to be able to get control for a dunk. For that we give them an opportunity to make 6 points? , the league doesn't want the perimeter players touched. Soon it will be 2 shots and the ball whenever you touch them. That will speed up the game and show the players when the league says no touch, it means NO TOUCH!

I haven't checked but I guess that means that all intentional fouls are 2 shots and the ball??? Or are they treating Intentional fouls differently? Where is the consistency in this league?

The league justify's this rule because the players have not been averaging 2 points on those plays. They average better than one point. That would be the result of poor freethrow shooting. Like I said before, why not give them 3 to make 2? I just do not agree with giving teams an opportunity to make 6 points on a play that would have only net 2 points.

This league is going to ! Nowadays there are only a few traditional teams out there, SA, Dallas, Both teams from LA, Utah to name a few with a traditional NBA team and it is no coincidence that those are the successful teams in the NBA. The rest of the league is made up of a bunch of run and gun teams that do not play defense. I watched the Pistons, that's right the Detroit Pistons who have made defense a tradition, play a zone 3/4th of the game against the lakers. It was disgusting! Man Up, Dammit!