New rules on contact / hand-checking

[Rich]

Based on my experiences as a clinician at a high school clinic today, it's going to be interesting this coming season. Even after telling people to CALL THE FOULS and reminding them to CALL THE FOULS, they weren't. I lost count of how many times a hand was placed on a ball-handler a second time without a whistle.

Maybe this will work itself out, but I'm expecting to hear "nobody's calling it that way" more than once this season.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Rich

Based on my experiences as a clinician at a high school clinic today, it's going to be interesting this coming season. Even after telling people to CALL THE FOULS and reminding them to CALL THE FOULS, they weren't. I lost count of how many times a hand was placed on a ball-handler a second time without a whistle.

Maybe this will work itself out, but I'm expecting to hear "nobody's calling it that way" more than once this season.

It is an artifact of too many years of people promoting the style of game where it was not a foul unless it knocked the opponent sideways...and only if he missed the shot.

[JetMetFan]

It will work if the officials' schedules are threatened if they don't call those fouls. Money talks. It will also work if we police ourselves.

That being said I think it will be harder to enforce on the H.S. level than it was on the NCAAW level. College coaches complain about those fouls not being called and they'll send video to a supervisor to back it up. Plus, observers will report back to the supervisors and with so many games either on TV or the web, supervisors can see what's being called on their own. How many people are observed during a H.S. season and how many coaches will complain, especially if the fouls aren't called and they're winning?

[bob jenkins]

It can get called if it comes strongly from the state down through all levels -- and the mesage gets to the coaches that this will be called.

Yes, you'll have some foul fests early in the season, but by christmas the players will have adjusted.

IL had an even stricter enforcement of the rule last year and the message (generally) got through.

[OrStBballRef]

I've only done a few summer league games this year (all on the women's side) and so far I've actually seeing it be enforced fairly well not perfectly well, but pretty good so far.

That being said the girls side I have done is in several high caliber tournaments over here where they are skilled enough not to hand check up top.

Most of my calls with this new rule have been in the post with the arm bar or two hands on etc...one game we probably called 4-5 on one teams post defenders for trying to guard like this. Kids got the message and adjusted coaches didn't complain at all because we were consistent early and often.

I have to say I do like the new rule about the handchecks as I think it will clean up the game. That being said I could easily see a lot of the freshman and JV games take a lot longer now because those kids may not be as fast as to react to the changes as the varsity players.

[bainsey]

I kept the new rule in my during camp last weekend. The camp director noted I was calling hand-checks at times that were probably pushes. Still, there were times I passed on hand checks when the dribbler was beating his defender. Even if the defender had two hands on the dribbler, if RSBQ isn't compromised, I don't see the point of a whistle here.

As I've read it, the rule doesn't really allow to take advantage/disadvantage into account. It comes across as being automatic, which as we know, isn't always effective.

[BillyMac]

10-6-12 New
The following acts constitute a foul when committed against a ball handler/dribbler:
a. Placing two hands on the player.
b. Placing an extended arm bar on the player.
c. Placing and keeping a hand on the player.
d. Contacting the player more than once with the same hand or alternating hands.
Rationale: Rather than continuing to make hand-checking a point of emphasis year after year, simply add a brand new rule that requires a personal foul be called any time this type of contact occurs on a player holding or dribbling the ball outside of the lane area. The NFHS game needs this type of illegal contact on the perimeter ball handlers and dribblers eliminated.

[reffish]

I guess the point is coaches don't want two hands on their dribblers. Trying to officiate advantage/disadvantage is too subjective to a group of officials, so, two hands; foul. Seems pretty easy and makes my job easy, I don't have to judge advantage, just the defense, which; isn't that what we tell ourselves, officiate, err, ref the defense?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by bainsey

I kept the new rule in my during camp last weekend. The camp director noted I was calling hand-checks at times that were probably pushes. Still, there were times I passed on hand checks when the dribbler was beating his defender. Even if the defender had two hands on the dribbler, if RSBQ isn't compromised, I don't see the point of a whistle here.

As I've read it, the rule doesn't really allow to take advantage/disadvantage into account. It comes across as being automatic, which as we know, isn't always effective.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

10-6-12 New
The following acts constitute a foul when committed against a ball handler/dribbler:
a. Placing two hands on the player.
b. Placing an extended arm bar on the player.
c. Placing and keeping a hand on the player.
d. Contacting the player more than once with the same hand or alternating hands.
Rationale: Rather than continuing to make hand-checking a point of emphasis year after year, simply add a brand new rule that requires a personal foul be called any time this type of contact occurs on a player holding or dribbling the ball outside of the lane area. The NFHS game needs this type of illegal contact on the perimeter ball handlers and dribblers eliminated.

Bainsey:

My rule of thumb is: a) one hand is a hand check, and b) two hands is a push. That said, if I were evaluating you I would give you my rule of thumb but not ding you. I would ding you if a defender put two hands on the ball handler and you did not call a foul.


Billy:

What I find adorable about NFHS R10-S6-A12 is that 2014-15 will be my 44th year officiating and everything listed in R10-S6-A12 has always been a foul in both NFHS and NCAA Men's/Women's because basketball is a "non-contact" sport.

With apologies to Mel Brooks: "Rules! I don't need no stinking rules to call a personal foul for illegal contact!"

MTD, Sr.

[Rich]

We had one play where the player committed a foul (by the standards of the new rule) just after the ball handler had beat him and had a clear path to the basket.

It was a multiple touch on the ball handler by the defender, BTW.

I still think this is one where you want to have a slow whistle. The NFHS may not agree, however. Hopefully all our states will give us guidance.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by bainsey

I kept the new rule in my during camp last weekend. The camp director noted I was calling hand-checks at times that were probably pushes.

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Bainsey:

My rule of thumb is: a) one hand is a hand check, and b) two hands is a push. That said, if I were evaluating you I would give you my rule of thumb but not ding you. I would ding you if a defender put two hands on the ball handler and you did not call a foul.

The "hand-check" foul has only been in the books for a few years. Why? All hand checks are also either a push or illegal use of hands or both. The only actual difference is in that each communicates a slightly different thing.

The hand check foul was only added because those types of fouls were not getting called enough. After still not being called enough the NFHS has now added explicit wording. They really want it called.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I would ding you if a defender put two hands on the ball handler and you did not call a foul.

Originally Posted by Rich

I still think this is one where you want to have a slow whistle.

Mark, I hope you would mean that if the defender weren't already beaten. With all due respect, I have to agree with Rich here. If you have two hands on a ball handler in front of you, or if the handler is in the shooting act, I can understand a whistle. However, if the ball-handler is driving, and RSBQ is not compromised, doesn't a whistle actually benefit the defense (foul count notwithstanding)?

I'm not sure there are enough quality officials at the High School level (myself included) to properly enforce these hand checking rules.

Even the college guys had preseason games with 60-70 fouls and some would argue those guidelines trailed off during conference play and the NCAA tournament (UK-Louisville being one shining example).

[Rich]

Originally Posted by AremRed

I'm not sure there are enough quality officials at the High School level (myself included) to properly enforce these hand checking rules.

Even the college guys had preseason games with 60-70 fouls and some would argue those guidelines trailed off during conference play and the NCAA tournament (UK-Louisville being one shining example).

They're easy to enforce. They're pretty much absolutes. One just has to have the stones and the backing to enforce them.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Billy:

What I find adorable about NFHS R10-S6-A12 is that 2014-15 will be my 44th year officiating and everything listed in R10-S6-A12 has always been a foul in both NFHS and NCAA Men's/Women's because basketball is a "non-contact" sport.

With apologies to Mel Brooks: "Rules! I don't need no stinking rules to call a personal foul for illegal contact!"

MTD, Sr.

Exactly what I was told two weeks ago at camp. Coaches were complaining about it. A clinician told him that it has always been in the rule book. We as officials weren't calling it consistently, or in some cases at all. It was then addressed with the RSBQ. Still wasn't getting done, so now it is an automatic.