Were those words *ever* there?

My guess was it came up in the 10 seconds context with an angels-on-the-head-of-a-pin discussion about a shot that hit the backboard and went in or hit the backboard before the rim and a "what if" about the 10 seconds expiring in between. So this was a simple, fix the timing on it hitting *something* within 10 seconds, without realizing that the same rule was what mandated that the FT have contact with the rim to be valid. But clearly a guess.

BTW, in the real world, would anyone call the 10 second violation with the ball in the air at the 10 second mark, or do you really call it more like at 12 seconds for blatant violations? Just curious.

Oh. Hell. No.

Not on the first or second one... maybe on the 3rd or 4th one after I'd warned both the player AND the HC about it.

The FT requirement is to *release* the ball before 10 seconds (and then have it strike the ring / enter the basket). The ball does *not* need to strike the ring before 10 seconds.

Doh! That would make my whole theory pretty stupid, wouldn't it . . .:o

T'would seem the confused editor is really the only logical explanation then, as it is inconceivable that they intended to make that change AND didn't think it was worthy of noting as a change.

I just heard back from Peter Webb. The addition of the two words or backboard was a mistake and the NFHS will be sending out a correction.

MTD, Sr.

The problem is that 9-1 is the ONLY place in the rules for the requirement that (A) any free throw either be successful or strike the ring. It is mentioned in the Casebook in two places, but not in the rules. Add (B) "or backboard" and the rules have nowhere else that requirement (A) be met.

Solved now that the apparent correction from NFHS came out -- cf. other recent post.

Haven't seen that out on the NFHS website yet.

I hereby volunteer, with two other forum contributors of your choice, to serve on the new OPCBWOPTROC:
"Officials' Proofreading Committee before We Officially Print the Rulebook or Casebook."

Dear NFHS,
I do stuff like this at work and I'm fired. You have how many on your "Rules Committee"? I see the pictures of 13 in the front of my flawed rulebook. Errors like this are quite beneath any professional organization. You can do better than this. I'm here to help. Email me. And BillyMac.

No Compromise ...
 

In order for me to participate on this Proofreading Committee, I will require that the NFHS supply me with a dish of M&M's from which all the brown M&M's have been removed.