Note on Proposed Rules

By Tyler Broyles

Fellow Captains, I haven’t formed my personal opinion on the slew of rule proposals that have been offered so far but I feel like I should give at least one potential pitfall that I could see if some of these rules take place. Much of the rules mention increasing the difficulty of the game. This transition in difficulty would be much less painful for the most competitive teams as their roster caliber is much stronger than the bottom tier teams. The upper tier teams will be able to cope with the changed rules. As you descend the ladder the teams this becomes increasingly difficult. One of the few ways Ohio teams can “compete” with Michigan schools is by some of the lee way the rules give us currently. As we tighten the rules and increase the difficulty I fear there will be a further stratification of the league. If Team A has 12 of their 15 that are well rounded enough to adapt then they will probably manage, however, teams like BGSU would have 5-6 players that would make the transition without issue. My biggest fear with increasing the difficulty of our game comes from deepening the already apparent skill gap between teams. As a lower tier team I am not asking for sympathy or special circumstances, but I would like to defend teams of a lesser caliber. I recognize that the rule proposals tend to be dominated by the most active players (which tend to be the best teams captains), and felt that some potential warning should be given.

Another proposed rule on clean blocking

Proposed Rule Change by Wes Peters

NOTE: This is a proposition to change the same rule that Dylan Fettig has proposed, only slightly different.

Thrown balls are live off an opponent’s blocking ball. However, only the initial target who blocks the ball has the potential to be called out (Besides the original thrower if it is ruled a catch).  Continue reading “Another proposed rule on clean blocking”

Change the definiton of the Legitimate Attempt Zone

Rule Proposal by Zach Bachner

Change the definiton of the Legitimate Attempt Zone (LAZ).

From: “a step and a lunge in any of the 3 dimensions.”

To: “The current catching player’s maximum fullbody reach at the time of the ball’s arrival.” …essentially, a circle around the catching player with a radius of roughly 3 feet.


There have been many around the league proposing new rules to speed up the pace of the game. Nothing slows the game down more than when both teams continuously solo throw just to kill the clock. This rule would require stronger and more precise throws or else there would be an opportunity for a catch by the opposing team.

This rule would present more ooportunites for catchers and throwers to shine, resulting in a more enjoyable game to play and watch. There is also a likely possibility that this rule can cause games to have a higher point total on average. We could see exciting games ending in a score of 5-4 rather than 1-0.

Proposed rule change on Blocking

Proposed by Dylan Fettig

Thrown balls are live off of an opponent’s blocking ball.

All other rules would remain the same (ie thrown balls only have the potential to eliminate one player, team catches stay the same, etc.)


There are many reasons this rule needs to change.

Reffing becomes much easier with this rule. If a player is ever hit with a ball before it hits the ground they are out and traps no longer exist since you can catch with a held ball.

Blocking as a skill becomes more valuable. It takes more concentration to block a ball away from yourself, and other teammates, than it does to just get a piece of the ball.

Speed of the game will be increased. Since a higher skill of blocking is required, more people will will be getting out and games wont be finishing 1-0 like they have been.

Rule Proposal: Shot Clock reset for receiving team

Rule Clarification Proposal by David Cook: Shot Clock Violation

As of right now there is not a clear statement as to what the shot clock should be for the team that receives all the balls on a balls over. This year alone I know SVSU has experienced all 3 different situations:

1. The clock has been reset to 0.
2. The clock was rounded down to nearest increment of 5. (0,5, or 10)
3. The shot clock has remained the same for the team with all the balls.

I propose that either of the first two situations should be added into the rule book to eliminate confusion.

Editors Note: This was discussed in the 2015 Captains’ Meeting. It was not voted on last year for a rule change. This should be general practice though. If there is a shot clock violation, both teams’ shot clocks shall be reset to ‘0’. It will be added to the 2017 Rulebook. This will be the practice at Nationals 2016.

Proposed new yearly awards

Proposed new yearly awards by Dylan Fettig

In addition to the national champion trophy, I propose that the NCDA issues two new yearly trophies. The first to the team who finishes the regular season as the #1 overall ranked team and the second to the team that plays the most games during the season.

Since we do not currently have playoff positions to fight for to get into the national tournament, experience and tournament seeding are the only real things that motivate teams to play more games. I believe these awards will encourage teams to play more games and will produce higher quality games during the season.

Rule Proposal: Early Overtime

Rule Proposal: Early Overtime.

Similar to rule Early Halftime, where a point is scored with less than 4:00 min at the end of the half, the half “rolls over” into the next period.

If a point has been scored with less than 4:00 minutes remaining in the second half, Overtime [] will go into effect.

Officially and currently, teams must play out this remaining time and I always set up for the next regular point. However, I see this overridden a lot, so let’s go with the more natural thing?

Proposal for Nationals Scheduling

Proposed by ZM

Nationals is two things: the National Tournament (Section and the extra-strength Non-Bracket Matches (Section is purposely written broadly, but for the time being we’ll refer to it as Saturday and Sunday. Currently, it defines that each team gets three unique opponents to play on Saturday.

I propose a less stringent definition of Saturday’s required games, a minimum of two. For Nationals 2016, I also propose that each team receives 2 matches on Saturday and at least one game in Sunday’s tournament bracket. This will guarantee that each team receives at least three matches over the Nationals Event weekend.  Continue reading “Proposal for Nationals Scheduling”

Proposal building on Match Court Numbers

Rule proposal by ‎Adam Pfeifer‎ [Akron]

I know there is a form of this proposed but I have talked to a few people and think this would be a better solution. We will call Akron team one and Baldwin Wallace team two. Akron can only bring 11 players to a tournament. Baldwin Wallace has a full roster + 2 so 17 total. Instead of Akron being four people down a whole match the rule would be as followed. First point Baldwin Wallace would still play 15. Akron would have 11. After the first point Baldwin Wallace would go down to 12 active players on the rush and have their other three players on the side line who can still get in the game if they get catches. The reason for this proposal is for two reasons. One we have had teams drop out of tournaments because they could only get 11 or 12 people. In their mind why go when you are at a huge disadvantage at the start. Two this would add to the level of competition at tournaments when teams cannot get a full roster.

Arguments for this. Teams with full rosters will still keep an advantage in these games. This will also help a lot of new programs with being able to actually play and gain solid experience. How does everyone feel about this rule?

Proposal for an Even Numbers sub-rule

Proposed by Zig Low numbers ish area – Players on the court at the start of a point must match the maximum capability of the opponent.

  • If a team can only bring 12 players to an event, their opponent must play 12 players in the point.
  • No change to Rosters: this opponent matches 12 players in the point but can keep 20 players on the Roster.
  • Maximum capability: A team must play the max amount of valid players they have. The team with the smaller roster can’t play 13 if they still have a 17 player roster.
  • A case or sub-rule to include that it applies to every new point? For example a serious injury causing a team to be 14 at the start of the next point will cause the opponent to match 14?
  • Does not apply to penalties (yellow/red cards)

Meant to keep the game fair for teams that do not have the ability to bring a full 15 player roster, most often newly formed organizations, far flung teams, and less well off clubs.

Related build by Adam

Proposed Rule for a Rebound Catch

New rule proposal by Adam Pfeifer

This would be called something to the effect of a kill/ hit catch. This would be mostly on the rush due to close quarters. If player A throws a ball and hits player B he would be out. If the ball thrown is in the air player A could catch that ball before it becomes dead to count as a catch for his team. This would give teams more incentive to throw on the rush and get teammates back in that got caught or thrown out right away. It would also encourage teams to throw at a target (a real person) more than just throwing a step and lunge away throw to restart their shot clock. Again I just feel like it’s another aspect of the game that would not drastically change it, but would add another element to game strategy.

AJP 2016-03-14: First taste of Nationals

Mario and Zig go over the potential policies and rules in that continual evolution of the NCDA. Zig proposes an even team rule and Mario proposes a consecutive match limits. We even launch into talking about future flavors of NCDA play.

All that an more, try a listen!

Edited by Mario Romanelli.


Policy: Consecutive Match Limit

Proposed by Mario Romanelli

Consecutive Match Limit – During any official NCDA tournament, no team may be allowed to play no more than 3 consecutive matches without at least a 30 minute break.

The point of this rule is to protect the safety of players and to allow them a chance to recover from previous games.
This also makes sure that a home team won’t create a tournament schedule that may benefit them from playing a team that has played multiple consecutive matches; thus giving them an advantage over the tired road team
This does not put a limit on how many matches a team can play in one tournament.

Debate: Should home/away teams be allowed to play more consecutive matches if they want?

Submit a rule or policy: 2016 Captains’ Meeting

Members of the NCDA (players, officers, alumni, officials, staff, etc) may submit a rule or policy for the 2016 Captains’ Meeting. Here’s this year’s process since we are moving away from the forum.

Open Submission

  • Submit via email to, any member can submit, not just Captains or Officers.
  • Or if in the group, make a post in the facecool Captains’ Club. About one post per policy.
  • Members are encouraged to do their part and present a total proposal. Cite potential sections of the rulebook or constitution if applicable. Reason it out. Really people, this just makes it easier to prove your point and make your case.
  • Cut off is late Wednesday night, 2016-04-13.


  • NCDA Staff takes the policy/rule and creates a post on the website. Anyone can make a comment there to discuss. Find them through the “2016 Captains’ Meeting” tag group.
  • Alternatively, generally each rule/policy will have it’s own thread in the Captains’ Club and discussed there too. (If it doesn’t already have a thread, Staff will post in Captains’ club on others behalf)
  • Each facebook thread will link to an NCDAcom post, and vice versa


  • Throughout the discussion, Staff will work to quantify the policy to prepare it for final discussion at the 2016 Captains’ Meeting.
  • Light discussion will happen during the Captains’ Meeting, but because so many members will not be represented…
  • Voting happens during the off season, after Nationals.