The no-charge zone was discussed by league officials with team coaches in a consultative meeting a few weeks back. The coaches agreed that like in the National Basketball Association (NBA) rule, the no-charge zone will be applicable only if the offensive player crashes into the secondary defender.
The rule will not apply on a primary defender because of the undue advantage it gives to a dominating post player like a Shaquille O’Neal or an Asi Taulava or a Marlou Aquino.
Imagine a situation where Asi can just muscle his way inside the lane, move into the no-charge zone and ram through his defender knowing he won’t be called for a charge. That’s why in the NBA, the rule applies only if a secondary defender is involved. If not, Shaq will just walk all over his defender.
The zone is outlined by a half-moon inside the painted area. PBA technical committee manager Perry Martinez explained that the rule will encourage slashing since penetrators won’t be hampered by the thought of an offensive foul in driving the lane, once inside the no-charge zone.
The rule will eliminate the possibility of a judgment error on a referee calling either a block or charge in such a situation.
Martinez pointed out that judgment is also involved in deciding whether or not contact was made by a penetrator in a no-charge zone. In the NBA, he said there was a recent instance during a game when a referee, situated from a better vantage point, overruled a call from another referee in determining if a player was in the no-charge zone.
During the coaches’ meeting, a proposal to adopt the NBA’s rule on illegal defensive camping was thumbed down. The rule prohibits a defender from staying inside the shaded area for more than 2.9 seconds. It’s like a three-second violation, on offense, in reverse. The rule is applied in the NBA to avoid hulking centers from taking a stationary position near the basket and to provide an opening for slashers to penetrate.
The coaches said the new rule will mean another adjustment in tactics this season and suggested to defer approval.
"The coaches felt taking away the illegal defense rule was a positive step," said Martinez. "That encouraged teams to develop shooters. The proposed rule would encourage slashing. The coaches thought we shouldn’t rush things since they’ve just gotten accustomed to some new rules that were applied last year. Besides, the no-charge zone will also encourage slashing."
Another proposal to the Board is the elimination of the FIBA goaltending rule, which allows ball interference above the rim after it touches the hoop. In the NBA, the rule is clear–no ball interference whatsoever above the rim, offensively or defensively.
"The NBA does not follow the FIBA rule because it could lead to a judgment or borderline call," said Martinez. "There are so many big guys in the NBA and a rule like that could create problems. In the Fiesta Cup where the import ceiling is 6-8, we could encounter some problems in the application of this FIBA rule."
Martinez said he’s not worried about PBA players adjusting to the FIBA rule on goaltending if they play in international tournaments.
"It’s like the three-point line which is shorter in FIBA competitions," noted Martinez. "We’re sticking to the PBA three-point distance which is farther."
The idea is to make it a little more difficult to hit the triple otherwise a game can turn into an outside shooting contest.
"In international competitions, PBA players will just have to adjust not only to the three-point distance but also to the rule on goaltending," said Martinez.
The PBA rule on instant replay will also stick. Martinez said the instant replay is resorted to only in game-altering situations where the referees are not certain if a shot was made within time in the fourth period or overtime.
"There are limitations in our TV camera angles so we don’t want to expand the coverage of the instant replay rule to include stepping on the sideline or stepping on the three-point arc," added Martinez. "There were only two instances where we consulted the instant replay last year and one, involving Jerry Codiñera, wasn’t even too clear, considering our limited camera angles."
Martinez said the instant replay cannot be used to determine if a game-altering shot was a triple or not. "The referee will signal if a shot was taken from three-point distance and that’s not debatable because it’s a judgment call," said Martinez. "But we can consult the instant replay to determine if the shot was made before or after the last buzzer."
From all indications, the proposed rules will lead to a more exciting style of play and diminish the incidence of questionable judgment calls.
Postscript. Don’t forget to send in your entries to the Nike Air Zoom Huarache 2K4 contest. Four pairs–each costing P6,995–are up for grabs. We’ll choose four lucky winners in a raffle. Answer these three questions–1. Name any two of the University of Michigan Fab Five players who wore the Nike Air Flight Huaraches during the 1992-93 March Madness; 2. Name any two NBA players who will wear the Nike Air Zoom Huarache 2K4 limited edition shoes at the NBA All-Star Game on Sunday; and 3. What is the Huarache fondly known as? The answers are in yesterday’s column. Write your answers, name, age, address, telephone number, signature, occupation and Nike shoe size in a slip of paper and send to "A Sporting Chance" Huarache contest, Philippine Star, 13th and Railroad Streets, Port Area, Metro Manila. Deadline is 5 p.m., Thursday, Feb. 12. Winners will be contacted by phone and must claim their prizes from 6 to 9 p.m. at the Nike Park, Glorietta 4, Makati, on Friday, Feb. 13. Join now. Don’t delay. Don’t forget to include an actual Philippine STAR sports masthead, including the date of the newspaper.