January 18, 1940

To Members,
National Basketball Committee:

If the annual questionnaires are tobe effective they must be printed in time
for distritation before the various tarnaments. It always requires consider-
able time far the preliminary work which must precede the actual printing of
the eS Consequently, I am urging that you give iampiia te attention
to the suggestions in this letter.

The quistionsire should probably contain a cheek up on sentiment relative to the
fol Lowing chmges which were mde last year,

ot. Whether permitting any player to take time out is enthapanberrs
ok?- Whether permitting the offended team to keep possession after a technical fm)
is satisfactory.
: 05+ Wpether permitting a team to waive a free throw for a personal foul is satis-
: factory.
Oks. Whether the awarding of two f ree Siaeut in all eases when «a player who is in
the act of throwing is fouled from behind is satisfactory.

“be Whether the rule emcerring missing the ring on a free throw is satisfactory.

+ Whether » mandatory four-foot end space is satisfactory.

Here are other topics which might have value on the questionnaire:

  
  
  
   

“1. Should a plane surfaced backboard of the ie and shape sanctioned last spring,

be mde lecal for any group which might choose to install it?

2. Should a mojified board with a emvex surface be made optionally legal?

« Should the tollerance in ‘bounce of a basketball be reduced and what is the best

”  porasadag he ight? ;

a LD 4. Should college games be played in ten-minute quarters?

7 5. Is the problem of tall players sufficiently serious to warrant consideration of

higher basket?

e« Should the number of jump bells be further reduced by

a. Awarding ball to the offensive team, if it is in the air ma try at the
end of a quarter and is not successful.

be ‘By awarding ball to the team on defense, if shey ques a held ball outside
‘the lane or center restraining circle?

Ts should the three-seemd lane rule be eliminated for narT ow courts?

7 3» Formit a player to enter any number of times.

VP 9, Consider any foul (not flagrant) committed against a& player who is in his back

gourt as a technical foul.

« Should a penalty be assessed for diving?

Yours truly,

Ni Colo

Secretary, Questionnaire Committee

;