Too much TV - I am not saying ref talk is a substitute for blowing the whistle or issuing a tech. If something is blatant enough to warrant a tech, by all means call it. But there is so much yapping and body shots inside that a ref could call a foul everytime down on contact. I personally don't want to see a game with 40+ fouls and most of the starters on the bench at the end. The number 1 job of a ref is to impartially control a game. If telling the players to settle down without penalizing either team has that effect, I'm all for it.

I agree that the current rule is pretty arbitrary. I don't know how you feel about lacrosse so I'll not try to convert you (and your readers) but lacrosse provides a similar situation that is analogous to this very conundrum.

Once an offensive team has moved the ball into the offensive scoring area (in lacrosse this is referred to as the restraining box) and chooses to either kill time (or if that team has the lead and less than 2 minutes remain in the game) they are required to "Keep it in the box" as instructed by the officials to prevent stalling. If the offensive team inadvertantly carries the ball out of said restraining box, the possession is awarded to the defensive team (the same could apply here-if the offensive b-ball team simply carried it over the half-line the guy's an idiot and should have the ball awarded to the other team). However, if the ball is dropped or if a defender forces the ball out of the stick of the offender and the ball should leave the restraining box, a player from the offensive team may not regain possession of the ball until a defensive player touches the ball.

So, let's say, in a basketball game, a pass is mishandled or something, and the ball is in the back court, the offensive team cannot touch the ball until it is touched by the defensive team. If the back court situation was predicated by the defensive team touching the ball, I think the same situation should apply: the offensive team could not touch the ball until a defender touched the ball. This gives neither team a free pass as one has to play defense to regain possession, risking a foul, and the other has not gotten the advantage of an inbounds situation.

Could work, but someone would probably just call a timeout.

I agree with King about the timeout issue, and think that there are too many timeouts in general. How about adopting the international rules?

In international basketball, timeouts are only given in dead-ball situations or after made baskets. These are requested at the scorer's table by the coach. Players can't call timeouts at all.

Under this setup, players have more reponsibility for having to make on-court decisions, especially near the end of the game. For example, the coach can't call a timeout to set up a last shot unless there's been a made basket or dead ball. The players have to make those decisions and plays in the heat of the action. More exciting in my book.

I know this is off-topic, but no less off-topic than your post.

I have no sympathy for a school that insists on keeping its racist mascot despite widespread academic condemnation of it. If you really were concerned about fairness in sports you wouldn't support an organization that so blatantly stereotypes Native Americans.

...could we all please observe a moment of silence here in honor of Ray Meyer, who passed away on St. Pat's Day? During his heyday as DePaul U's basketball coach, a popular phrase on students' T-shirts was "We Are DePaul." (I think it was a takeoff on "We Are Devo" which was a popular song at the time.) Well...Coach Meyer WAS DePaul - and in a way, always will be. Hail and Farewell!

1) There's harldy a more irrational coaching practice than benching a player based on the number of fouls he's committed. While it might make sense to bench a player with three fouls in the first half, as a rule, it just doesn't make sense to take a player out of a game because you're afraid the player might have to come out of the game. Even with four fouls, you're figuring he's going to commit the fifth one at some point. Which strategy is more likely to keep him in the game, keep him in the game and hope for the best or take him out of the game and guarantee he's not on the floor contributing?

2) More support for a different timeout rule in basketball: Only one timeout allowed per team in the final two minutes of the game. Let the players play!

ok, i'm writing this just cause i hope it helps me just let it go (after all, who really cares about stupid 2nd round loss in the tourney) - but the illini got screwed, 38 trips to the foul line for washington to 11, ELEVEN!, for illinois? that's just too big a disparity. grrrrrr.

ok, i can now hopefully move on with my life

good column kk

CBS abbreviated Arizona as ZONA up until a few years ago (maybe last year too; ZONA v. ILL is still burned in my brain). If you get the prestige of a high seed, then you're in the running for a cool abbrev. Plus VILL is resevered for the NIT Pitino squad, the Ville.

The Chevy-zeski corporate sponsors and Dookies would strap in for this matchup: CHEVY v. NOVA. That's only if Redick doesn't go Gumby gams and loses his jumper.

Four Catholic teams - ZAGA, Georgetown, BC, and NOVA - in the Sweet 16, what ever happened to giving up basketball for Lent?

Yes it has been a great NCAA tournament and my only complaint with CBS is coach's wifes. Why does the camera need to stare at a coach's wife? College ball has always had a problem rewarding defense and changes are needed. A change also need to be made to keep a defense from stopping the clock away from the ball. Send the offense to the line for two shots if the ball is not touched. Again, as always love to read your column.

JIM