2-foul sit rule

[JonathanW_rivals]

Cal uses it, a lot of coaches use it.

I think it is stupid, at least to be a hard-fast rule for coaches to use every time, every situation, every player.

Why?
What do you want from your players? You want to get the most out of them while they are on the court. For your better players that means you want to maximize their time (minutes) on the court. You see it happen a handful of times a season, a key guy gets 2 fouls in the first 4 minutes, and because his coach goes by that rule, the player can play at most 24 minutes that game. But doing that means he doesn't get a breather in the 2nd half, which also might not maximize his play. So maybe he's down to 22 minutes max.
Are the last 4 minutes of the game more important than say 4 minutes in the middle? Some say yes, I say it depends, so no.
NO one wants to foul out. A guy gets 2 early fouls, he will be more selective, more careful less aggressive going forward. Now if the player takes that too far, then defensively he could become a liability, so the coach needs to consider that. How much better is this player with 2 fouls (or 3 or 4) than his replacement.
But I'd rather get 28 minutes from PJ but he foul out with 3 minutes to go, than 22 minutes from PJ and he finish the game with 3 or 4 fouls.
Now there may be exceptions. Say the guy is your primary ballhandler and best FT shooter, then maybe you really want him at the end of the game (where he will be getting fouled) more than the middle.

But when a guy gets that 2nd first half foul, or 3rd foul with more than 10min to go, it probably is a good idea to sit him for a minute, just to remind him he has foul trouble, so don't commit any silly fouls. And if the team is playing well without him, no need to rush him back (we saw that midway in the 2nd half on Saturday then Travis sat for a bit). But if things start to slip, I would put my better players back in.

 

[CatOfDaVille]

I agree with you. There's the law of averages, and there's common sense based on the situation.

It's similar to going for it on 4th and 1. The law of averages says you punt and play defense, however, common sense tells you that there are times when it makes sense to go for it (yard line, score, gameflow, etc.).

I do believe that I've seen Cal play an important player before with 2 fouls in the 1st half if we are down significantly. On Sat, we were still well in the game, so he probably saw no reason to risk it.

A counter argument to your opinion that you'd rather get more mins from PJ and have him foul out would be that he may not play as aggressively towards the end of the game (before fouling out) because of foul trouble. He might not get his 5th until 3 mins left, but he's probably playing defense differently from the 8 min mark to the 3 min mark with 4 fouls than he would with 3.

 

[Cardsstink]

I'd rather see him sit a guy after his first foul for 5 minutes so there's a good chance they a) think hard about not getting that 2nd foul and 2) have a good chance to play the last several minutes of a half and have some momentum carried into halftime instead of being ice cold for about an hour if you count halftime.

 

[WildcatfaninOhio]

I like the strategy of sitting a player after two PFs in first half. I think it’s smart, and agree with it 100%.

 

[blugrazz]

To some degree we are still trying to build some confident depth in the low post and we all know what Cal thinks about the SEC Tournament. I suspect we see him sneak in a 2 foul player at the end of the half during tourney time.

 

[DS849]

Then you got the referee's decision on what a foul is. Even if you are playing not to foul. Catch 22. Play hard take a chance you don't get called for a foul or slack off and hurt the team. I don't like the automatic 2 foul sit.

 

[Catluv]

When you leave a guy in and he gets a third foul he about useless for the rest of the game.

 

[catsfan3383]

When you leave a guy in and he gets a third foul he about useless for the rest of the game.

True, but when you sit a guy with two for 8 to 12 minutes of the first half he’s almost always useless the rest of the game anyway. He gets cold, out of rhythm and is 99% of the time completely unefective.
I hate the “mandatory” sit if you get 2 rule Cal and others use.
It needs to always be variable based on team, score and situations. Sometimes you HAVE to have “that guy” in the game, if you don’t it’s over before halftime (see PJ in UT game in Knoxville). No, we probably weren’t winning that game anyway, but it was an absolute complete white flag concession when Cal left him on the bench the entire 1st half. We were already without Travis and there was no way we were going to hold it together with EJ and Nick.
Sometimes you just have to take the risk and live with it.

 

[UKGrad93]

If you’re going to sit them for 5 minutes to remind them of foul trouble and to not commit any silly fouls, why not do that 5 minutes before tipoff?

I don’t think it’s a hard and fast rule for Cal or most coaches. I think many will put the player back in if things are getting out of hand.

 

[Catluv]

True, but when you sit a guy with two for 8 to 12 minutes of the first half he’s almost always useless the rest of the game anyway. He gets cold, out of rhythm and is 99% of the time completely unefective.
I hate the “mandatory” sit if you get 2 rule Cal and others use.
It needs to always be variable based on team, score and situations. Sometimes you HAVE to have “that guy” in the game, if you don’t it’s over before halftime (see PJ in UT game in Knoxville). No, we probably weren’t winning that game anyway, but it was an absolute complete white flag concession when Cal left him on the bench the entire 1st half. We were already without Travis and there was no way we were going to hold it together with EJ and Nick.
Sometimes you just have to take the risk and live with it.

The tourney game PJ sat out and came back the second half and played like his hair was on fire! I guess you could play by the seat of your pants but no one wants 3 fouls in the first half.

 

[JDHoss]

Would love to see the NCAA go to 6 fouls. Maybe even have a no foul out rule, but any foul after the 5th foul results in 2 shots and the ball for the opponent. I'm sick of seeing guys taken out of games by overzealous refs who want to be the center of attention.

 

[slushpump]

Don’t like it but it is the smart move to sit them with two fouls in the first halve. All the smart big time coaches do it.

 

[CELTICAT]

Let’s get our best player to stop chicken fighting every time some scrub puts a hand on him and this won’t be an issue

 

[CrazyCat74]

Let’s get our best player to stop chicken fighting every time some scrub puts a hand on him and this won’t be an issue

I hate that I agree with this response..lol

 

[BassProCat]

I'd rather see him sit a guy after his first foul for 5 minutes so there's a good chance they a) think hard about not getting that 2nd foul and 2) have a good chance to play the last several minutes of a half.

I agree with the 2 foul sit rule in the first half but this is what I’d like Cal to do.

If a starter picks up a foul early in the first half Cal tends to normally let them stay in and that has burned us twice with PJ and both came against UT.

I wish he would pull that player out and let them sit for a few minutes and let the refs get into a rhythm and allow that player to watch the game and see how refs are calling fouls.

 

[JC43]

Let’s get our best player to stop chicken fighting every time some scrub puts a hand on him and this won’t be an issue

Or send in Nick or Baker to entangle themselves with other team best player and get charged with double flagrants to get the opposing player from playing in the first half. Using a player who has only spot minutes vs player who is a major cog

 

[BlueWorldOrder74]

I’d say that cost us the Tennessee game in the SEC tourney, and played a role in the loss at TB. Sometimes you have to trust your best player to play through it. Just my opinion.

 

[kyhunter88]

Let’s get our best player to stop chicken fighting every time some scrub puts a hand on him and this won’t be an issue

Exactly. If PJ had just untangled himself and headed down court it's most likely a play on and he is still in the game. But he slapped at he guys arm and stared him down drawing attention to the play, monitor review, and PJ on the bench for the half.

 

[John Henry]

Let’s get our best player to stop chicken fighting every time some scrub puts a hand on him and this won’t be an issue

This is the answer pure and simple. Why would a smart player try to react to someone who is goading him into fouling to start with. So a player grabs you when the ref is not looking. Be smart and step away from that because you know any reaction by the player will cause the refs attention and bam. Foul on you. I wish Cal would instruct his players to follow that logic. Don't be a tough guy when it doesn't matter. Be a tough guy going full speed to the basket under control. Draw a foul, don't make one by reacting to someone messing with you.

 

[Cardsstink]

I agree with the 2 foul sit rule in the first half but this is what I’d like Cal to do.

If a starter picks up a foul early in the first half Cal tends to normally let them stay in and that has burned us twice with PJ and both came against UT.

I wish he would pull that player out and let them sit for a few minutes and let the refs get into a rhythm and allow that player to watch the game and see how refs are calling fouls.

Absofreakinlotuely. I swear you can't trust refs and if they know they can change the game by calling 2 on PJ early in the 1st half, I just have to believe some of them will do it. It's happened too many times over the years to our best players. (Fox against UNC in elite 8 still makes me fume.)

 

[Drcats2025]

The rule should be changed to 6 fouls. End of discussion.

 

[BassProCat]

(Fox against UNC in elite 8 still makes me fume.)

Gosh don’t remind me.

UNC received a few favorable whistles that tourney.

Arky got screwed hard that game with UNC. I know it was Berry but can’t remember if it was a traveling or charge he got away with towards the end of the game.

 

[Cardsstink]

Gosh don’t remind me.

UNC received a few favorable whistles that tourney.

Arky got screwed hard that game with UNC. I know it was Berry but can’t remember if it was a traveling or charge he got away with towards the end of the game.

Yep and if Auburn plays UNC, I don't see them being allowed to win that game, especially since it would possibly set up a UK/Auburn regional final which would be "bad for business".

 

[Real Deal 2]

Don’t like it but it is the smart move to sit them with two fouls in the first halve. All the smart big time coaches do it.

Coach K does not, he is the only big time coach I know that does not. He has lost or been affected in NCAA's by not sitting the guy. At least 2-3 games they have lost in last 15 years in tourney almost all of those were affected by a big or someone else picking up that 3rd in 1st half.

You always sit the guy, any more evidence needed was PJ coming out playing great and UK building 8 point lead with 3 minutes. He picks up 4th at 15 minute mark in second half then that game would be over because Travis would foul out. It is a smart move and only move unless you are getting blown out by 18-20, keeping it close or under 10 or 3 possession game.

 

[Deacon Jim]

After 2 fouls in the first half we need to send in a Goon to take care of opposing player!!!

 

[BassProCat]

Yep and if Auburn plays UNC, I don't see them being allowed to win that game, especially since it would possibly set up a UK/Auburn regional final which would be "bad for business".

If they do meet up AU better be on fire from deep.

 

[Xception]

I’m going to put it on our players, they pick up early fouls that they can avoid. PJ gets too many early fouls where he gets goated by the other player and their arms become entangled that leads to a review.

He needs to let the petty wrestling go so he can stay in the game, it’s time to decide if winning the game is more important than winning a personal battle.

 

[ruppcat]

Cal uses it, a lot of coaches use it.

I think it is stupid, at least to be a hard-fast rule for coaches to use every time, every situation, every player.

Why?
What do you want from your players? You want to get the most out of them while they are on the court. For your better players that means you want to maximize their time (minutes) on the court. You see it happen a handful of times a season, a key guy gets 2 fouls in the first 4 minutes, and because his coach goes by that rule, the player can play at most 24 minutes that game. But doing that means he doesn't get a breather in the 2nd half, which also might not maximize his play. So maybe he's down to 22 minutes max.
Are the last 4 minutes of the game more important than say 4 minutes in the middle? Some say yes, I say it depends, so no.
NO one wants to foul out. A guy gets 2 early fouls, he will be more selective, more careful less aggressive going forward. Now if the player takes that too far, then defensively he could become a liability, so the coach needs to consider that. How much better is this player with 2 fouls (or 3 or 4) than his replacement.
But I'd rather get 28 minutes from PJ but he foul out with 3 minutes to go, than 22 minutes from PJ and he finish the game with 3 or 4 fouls.
Now there may be exceptions. Say the guy is your primary ballhandler and best FT shooter, then maybe you really want him at the end of the game (where he will be getting fouled) more than the middle.

But when a guy gets that 2nd first half foul, or 3rd foul with more than 10min to go, it probably is a good idea to sit him for a minute, just to remind him he has foul trouble, so don't commit any silly fouls. And if the team is playing well without him, no need to rush him back (we saw that midway in the 2nd half on Saturday then Travis sat for a bit). But if things start to slip, I would put my better players back in.

Shoot, against pUKe I might sit him after one foul because you know #2 is right behind that one!

 

[turkeywildturkey]

Cal uses it, a lot of coaches use it.

I think it is stupid, at least to be a hard-fast rule for coaches to use every time, every situation, every player.

Why?
What do you want from your players? You want to get the most out of them while they are on the court. For your better players that means you want to maximize their time (minutes) on the court. You see it happen a handful of times a season, a key guy gets 2 fouls in the first 4 minutes, and because his coach goes by that rule, the player can play at most 24 minutes that game. But doing that means he doesn't get a breather in the 2nd half, which also might not maximize his play. So maybe he's down to 22 minutes max.
Are the last 4 minutes of the game more important than say 4 minutes in the middle? Some say yes, I say it depends, so no.
NO one wants to foul out. A guy gets 2 early fouls, he will be more selective, more careful less aggressive going forward. Now if the player takes that too far, then defensively he could become a liability, so the coach needs to consider that. How much better is this player with 2 fouls (or 3 or 4) than his replacement.
But I'd rather get 28 minutes from PJ but he foul out with 3 minutes to go, than 22 minutes from PJ and he finish the game with 3 or 4 fouls.
Now there may be exceptions. Say the guy is your primary ballhandler and best FT shooter, then maybe you really want him at the end of the game (where he will be getting fouled) more than the middle.

But when a guy gets that 2nd first half foul, or 3rd foul with more than 10min to go, it probably is a good idea to sit him for a minute, just to remind him he has foul trouble, so don't commit any silly fouls. And if the team is playing well without him, no need to rush him back (we saw that midway in the 2nd half on Saturday then Travis sat for a bit). But if things start to slip, I would put my better players back in.

Let the coaches coach, and you keep playing armchair quarterback. Don’t take this the wrong way, but they know a hell of a lot more about coaching than you ever will.

 

[KyCatFan1]

Or send in Nick or Baker to entangle themselves with other team best player and get charged with double flagrants to get the opposing player from playing in the first half. Using a player who has only spot minutes vs player who is a major cog

So basically a version of the John Chaney send in the goon defense.

 

[JC43]

So basically a version of the John Chaney send in the goon defense.

Send in Alexander or whoever hook and held pj in the first half for his flagrant, thus second foul in first half

 

[Anon1636470744]

I absolutely hate this rule. For one thing all players are not foul prone and can continue to play and never get a 3rd foul. Also if it is a tournament game there is no tomorrow if you lose so you have to run the risk. Fans pay their money to see the best players on the floor not sitting beside the coach.

 

[HalHR2500]

PJ has to be smarter period

Or Pull him after one foul for a few minutes in first half

 

[UKvisitor_rivals101449]

An innovative coach would teach his players how to play with 2 fouls in the 1st half. Other players would need to be coached on how to help the player out on D.

 

[JC CATS]

Cal uses it, a lot of coaches use it.

I think it is stupid, at least to be a hard-fast rule for coaches to use every time, every situation, every player.

Why?
What do you want from your players? You want to get the most out of them while they are on the court. For your better players that means you want to maximize their time (minutes) on the court. You see it happen a handful of times a season, a key guy gets 2 fouls in the first 4 minutes, and because his coach goes by that rule, the player can play at most 24 minutes that game. But doing that means he doesn't get a breather in the 2nd half, which also might not maximize his play. So maybe he's down to 22 minutes max.
Are the last 4 minutes of the game more important than say 4 minutes in the middle? Some say yes, I say it depends, so no.
NO one wants to foul out. A guy gets 2 early fouls, he will be more selective, more careful less aggressive going forward. Now if the player takes that too far, then defensively he could become a liability, so the coach needs to consider that. How much better is this player with 2 fouls (or 3 or 4) than his replacement. I think Barnes may have used that strategy with Alexander lol
But I'd rather get 28 minutes from PJ but he foul out with 3 minutes to go, than 22 minutes from PJ and he finish the game with 3 or 4 fouls.
Now there may be exceptions. Say the guy is your primary ballhandler and best FT shooter, then maybe you really want him at the end of the game (where he will be getting fouled) more than the middle.

But when a guy gets that 2nd first half foul, or 3rd foul with more than 10min to go, it probably is a good idea to sit him for a minute, just to remind him he has foul trouble, so don't commit any silly fouls. And if the team is playing well without him, no need to rush him back (we saw that midway in the 2nd half on Saturday then Travis sat for a bit). But if things start to slip, I would put my better players back in.

Actually though we stayed within 2 of UT without PJ why put him back in and risk 3rd foul. If we had started losing control then yeah go for it

 

[musrat59]

Send in Alexander or whoever hook and held pj in the first half for his flagrant, thus second foul in first half

 

[musrat59]

Walker was the UT player who goaded PJ . I don't recall him getting much playing time.

 

[BIGBLUE402]

An innovative coach would teach his players how to play with 2 fouls in the 1st half. Other players would need to be coached on how to help the player out on D.

How can you teach that though when refs will call games continuously different throughout the game?

Sometimes the refs will let you murder someone out there and not call a foul the other times they’ll call it if you breathe on a guy.

 

[JonathanW_rivals]

Would love to see the NCAA go to 6 fouls. Maybe even have a no foul out rule, but any foul after the 5th foul results in 2 shots and the ball for the opponent. I'm sick of seeing guys taken out of games by overzealous refs who want to be the center of attention.

That's interesting. How bad do you want that player in the game (2 shots & the ball if he fouls).

 

[poppycat]

When you leave a guy in and he gets a third foul he about useless for the rest of the game.

For experimental, (maybe in NIT or some preseason games) I would like to see 3 fouls per half in effect. (no carry over to second half)
Would not improve officiating, but would be interesting.