Flopping rule a flop

It’s almost final. The PBA’s controversial flopping rule will likely be a thing of the past next season, buried in the dark chapters of the league’s 35-year history.

According to PBA technical consultant Romy Guevara, the flopping rule has its roots in FIBA and while it’s still in the FIBA rule books, referees choose to ignore making the call which can put both the offensive and defensive team at a disadvantage.

In the PBA, the first flopping call stops the play on the floor, even if the offensive team has a clear shot at the basket because of the defensive player’s acting antics. The second call will also interrupt the play but a technical foul will be called with a free throw awarded to the team that was flopped on.

Defensive players resort to flopping to get the referee to call an offensive foul and “sell” the charge by overacting. Referees are sometimes fooled into blowing their whistles because of the “selling” job. If they don’t bite, play continues with the defensive player out of position. To stop the theatrics, the PBA thought of adopting FIBA’s flopping rule.

But the flopping rule has been misused by players themselves and could lead to cop-outs by referees. As an example, a defensive player may deliberately try to get a flopping call when he loses position on his man because it will stop the play. Obviously, that’s an undue advantage for the defensive player. Also, if the referee isn’t sure what to call – whether a block or a charge, he could cop-out by signaling a flop.

A defensive player who flops has to pay the price for the risk of not getting a call. If he flops, the offensive player gets a chance to create a play with the free space. A flop should be a no-call with the guiding principle that the less a referee blows his whistle, the better is the flow of a game.

Referees shouldn’t be given more opportunities to make a call with the flopping rule. If an offensive player commits a charging foul, then he must be called for it – simple as that. If a defensive player flops, it should be a let-go situation with the flopper taking the risk of freeing up his man.

A rule that is also subject to review is penalizing a team with no timeout left that challenges a three-point conversion in the last two minutes and is proved wrong after a review of the instant replay. The penalty is a technical foul. If the challenge is proved right, there is no penalty. A challenge may be made only on a dead-ball situation in the last two minutes. Referees may change a call on a three-point shot anytime during a game before the last two minutes.

The rule may extend to a team challenging a referee’s call on a last-touch or a stepping violation in the last two minutes. In the recent NBA Finals, referees consulted the instant replay to confirm last-touch calls in the ending two minutes when they couldn’t be sure which team deserved possession. That happened in Game 3 where referees checked the instant replays before confirming three possessions in the last two minutes. They went to the TV monitors on their own, without a challenge. The move was appreciated by fans since after all, referees are only human and if they can’t be sure about what could be a crucial game-changing call, the TV monitor is available to clear the air.

PBA deputy commissioner Chito Salud is studying whatever rule changes are necessary to preserve the “beauty” of the game without giving referees room to decide the outcome.

A league source said the flopping rule would’ve been killed if not for an unwritten policy to reject amending rules at midstream or during a season. Personally, I don’t understand why the flopping rule can’t be eliminated in time for the Fiesta Conference finals. If it’s on the way out, why give the rule a chance to ruin what is expected to be a closely-fought finals?

* * *

PBA media bureau chief and special assistant to the commissioner Willie Marcial said the other day the league may expand to 11 or up to 12 teams without creating problems in scheduling.

Next season, the PBA is assured of 10 teams with Barako Energy owner George Chua recently confirming the Coffee Masters will continue playing and Meralco expected to take over Sta. Lucia Realty’s franchise.

The possibility of an 11th team joining in the 11th hour was scuttled when Cebuana Lhuillier’s Danny Francisco said yesterday the timing may not be right at the moment for the pawnshop company to enlist.

“As what was mentioned to the PBA, it really isn’t part of our plans at the moment,” said Francisco. “We’ll let them know our position on this when we finalize our decision.”

Cebuana had made an inquiry about acquiring a new PBA franchise. “We’ll give them or any other group up to next week to express interest to join the league,” said Marcial. “But after next week, that’s it because we’ll start preparing for the draft and the schedule for next season.”

* * *

There is an ongoing contest among Meralco employees to come up with the most appropriate moniker for the new PBA team that’s taking over from Sta. Lucia Realty next season. So far, over 500 entries have been submitted with suggestions like the Megawatts, the Lightning, the Voltz, the Powermen and the Energizers.

Meralco, a 107-year-old company rich in basketball history, is launching a sports advocacy campaign with its participation in the PBA as the “enabling vehicle.” A source called it a social marketing strategy where Meralco will reach out to the masses in championing positivism while benefiting a religious cause-oriented organization whose identity will soon be disclosed.