In men’s basketball next season, expanded video replay review will include whether a player’s foot last touching the court was inbounds on a made shot before time expired.
Since these plays are automatically reviewed to see whether the shot was released before time expired, the NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel on Thursday approved the recommendation from the Men’s Basketball Rules Committee to give officials another tool to get the call right.
If the player’s foot is determined to be out of bounds, officials will put the exact time of the violation on the game clock.
However, if the shot is made and time remains on the game clock, a video review would not occur.
Previously, officials could not review whether a player’s foot was out of bounds prior to releasing a shot before time expires unless an out-of-bounds call was made by an official on the floor during live play.
Supporting officials
The panel approved a one-game suspension being added to the ejection of players, coaches or bench personnel who make physical contact or threaten referees.
The rules book already defines a violation as occurring when anyone “disrespectfully contacts an official or makes a threat of physical intimidation or harm, to include pushing, shoving, spitting or attempting to make physical contact with an official.” Men’s Basketball Rules Committee members feel proposing a suspension can help deter such behavior toward officials.
In January, the Playing Rules Oversight Panel issued a directive to all NCAA rules committees to review their sportsmanship and ethical conduct rules.
Experimental rule
Last month, the Men’s Basketball Rules Committee forwarded an experimental rule for the 2025 NIT that would allow a coach to appeal out-of-bounds calls for video replay review in the last two minutes of games, pending approval from the NIT Board.
The experimental rule would eliminate the official’s voluntary ability to review out-of-bounds calls on the floor in the last two minutes of the game.
Instead, these calls for a video review would be tied to the timeouts a team has remaining. If a team appeals the call and it is overturned, the team making the appeal would retain the timeout.
If the review fails, the team making the appeal would lose a timeout.
If no timeouts remain, coaches could still appeal, but if the appeal fails, they would be assessed an excessive timeout administrative technical, meaning their opponents would shoot two free throws and maintain possession of the ball.
Committee members supported this experimental rule after receiving feedback from the men’s basketball coaching community, which expressed interest in challenging calls using video replay review.