The recent rise in deliberate fouling to target bad free throw shooters has sent some fans info hysterics.

As was the case during the original era of paranoia when Shaquille O'Neal was subjected to the hack-a-Shaq tactics, many NBA observers are saying the ploy is bad for the sport.

It's bad for the casual fan, they scream.

It's making the matches take too long, they pine.

It's ugly basketball, they plead.

The rules must be changed, they cry.

Correct on all counts ... except for the last one. There's no way the rules should be changed just to help the small percentage of players in the NBA who struggle to sink much more than half their attempts from the charity stripe, or in some cases, not even 50 per cent.

One supposed solution is to give the team that has been fouled the option of foregoing the trip to the line, retains possession with an in-bound from the sideline.

Another is to give the team the option of choosing a teammate to take the foul shots.

Yet another proposal is to extend the two-minute rule which gives possession on top of foul shots after deliberate hacking.

The rule book shouldn't be altered to protect the few who struggle with the most fundamental of the game's fundamentals.

Would golf allow gimmes for players who miss short putts? Would tennis offer a third serve for those who struggle to get the ball in play?

Even though there's not that many players who can't hit their free throws, that number will skyrocket in the future if the next generation knows there's less incentive to be competent at the line.

The dirty little secret with foul shooting at NBA level is it's pretty much all in the mind. All players at this elite level have specialist shooting coaches breaking down their technique to the nth degree. The mechanics of shooting an uncontested shot from 15 feet away is not the issue. It's mostly to do with the psychology of standing at the line, being expected to nail what should be an easy task much more often than not.

You often hear stories about how free throw bricklayers like DeAndre Jordan and Dwight Howard go on lengthy streaks when practising at shootaround, away from the cameras and crowds.

None of this is to say that watching poor foul shooters struggle to find the basket isn't excruciating. The deliberate foul ploy is usually only used as a fourth-quarter desperation tactic which can add boring, unnecessary  extra minutes onto an already too long closing stretch.

If the NBA decision makers are serious about shortening the end of matches, they would cut the number of timeouts. But if the choice is between putting up with complaints about drawn-out final quarters or voluntarily cutting the number of opportunities to squeeze in television advertising revenue while coaches draw up often neglected intricate plays, you can be sure the NBA won't be taking option two.

Follow Hoops Heaven on Twitter