NFHS Basketball Questionnaire
 

Questionnaire is live

http://www.nfhs.org/sports-resource-...uestionnaires/

I was skeptical of the 5-foul-per-quarter bonus added in NCAA-W this season, but I'm now a fan. Coaches dwell less on foul count, and we shoot fewer total free throws.

On the other hand, burn the advance-the-ball option. Burn it with fire. I say. :mad:

I like that. Of course we went to 18-minute halves this season.

I hope they don't try to change closely guarded to 3 feet. As said in another thread this week, the justification for the change to 6 feet in women's was the thought that it would decrease the fouls from the defense. I think this would be a problematic change.

Agreed. It's counter-intuitive to ask officials to emphasize the hand-checking guidelines and then make a rule change which brings defenders closer to BH/Ds in order to initiate a closely-guarded count.

PLEASE get rid of the 1 and 1 bonus and lets shoot two always!
All the unnecessary contact and resetting players after that first shot is silly...

Completely disagree (though I understand why it would make it easier for referees in many ways). So called double bonus is an additional penalty. Regular bonus is a benefit to the team that commits fewer fouls over the course of the game such that at end game they have a greater opportunity to escape the foul with no points given up. (I initially disliked the double bonus, but over time think that it is a good balance in punishing too many fouls.)

BTW, among the reasons why NCAAW went to two shots after the 5th foul was to reduce contact during FTs. They also wanted to increase scoring.

Removing one potential CE is a nice added benefit.

In Her Jock ...
 

Agree. I worked a Connecticut girls prep school game last week where we used three feet. Tough situation to officiate, counting five, and watching for hand checking, held ball, timeouts, and everything else that happens in a high school girls game.

I don't see how 3 feet would be any more difficult to officiate than 6 feet. If the player is inside 3 feet you're counting anyway.

If your mind is focused on the fact that something has changed, then until you get used to the change and it becomes second nature (like 6 feet is now), I could see how some could have problems taking it all in.

Many guys dont know what 6 feet is so maybe now they can be more accurate since except for lower level ball if a player cant touch the ball handler with their arms, they aren't within 3 feet.

6 feet is easy, but many operate as if the rule is 3.

You're damn right Billy.

It may create more situations where their is potential contact. With 6', the defender can get a count going at 6' with little risk of contact. At 3', the chance for contact certainly rises.

I'm in favor of five team fouls per quarter being the threshold and resetting the count with each new quarter.
Of course, the NFHS will have to specify that there is no reset of the foul count for extra periods!

Agreed.

I was neutral on that issue. The pros and cons (many of which have been articulated here) seem quite balanced.

That said, if the rule is changed, I will watch with amusement as states like MN, WI, RI, etc., try to figure out what they're going to do with the halves they currently play in. You can either suck it up and go back to quarters, or basically keep the current 1-and-1 rule as a supplemental state rule. Or perhaps compromise and eliminate 1-and-1 at 7, but go straight to two free throws at 10 for the half.

With NCAAW shifting to quarters, the current trend looks to be playing quarters at all levels of competition.
HS = 8 minutes, college = 10 minutes, NBA = 12 minutes, FIBA = 10 minutes

I'm surprised no one has brought up the "unintentionally slapping the backboard in a legitimate attempt to block the shot is BI" idea.

I hate it. The NFHS realizes no one is calling Ts for backboard slaps anymore and that most are borderline situations where there's at least some reasonable doubt about the player's intentions. Yet the offended coach always stands up and yells, "that's goaltending!" proving time and time again that most coaches know nothing about the rules.

Meanwhile the NCAA wrote a very nice rule change a couple years back that adds such a BI clause when the ball is on/in the basket or in the cylinder. That makes sense, especially in college where many backboards are portable and therefore less rigid.

The way the NFHS idea was written in the survey, it seems like we want to start calling BI when the backboard gets slapped on a shot regardless of the ball's location at the time. I don't like that idea; you would end up deterring a lot of good shot block attempts, and coaches would still be PO'd, only this time when on defense vice offense.

I think that would be a horrible idea. For one HS kids are often trying to block shots and even the college rule it is a judgment call. Officials would still not call it unless you say any touch of the backboard is a violation.

Again, not very many reasons to even call a T. It is rare and it is often an attempt to make a block missed. Most kids are not getting up there in the first place. A none issue.

Still waiting for even a situation to call this and it has not happen. And I rarely see this ever happen on TV. Again, a none issue.

Peace

Fouls should be a deterrent, not a strategy at the high school level. That might work for older and smarter players, but resetting after the quarter is silly IMO. And it does not seem to make the game faster at the women's side at least when we work behind them in our men's games most of the time. It seems like these games take longer than they used to.

Peace

I'm even more surprised nobody's brought up the question about eliminating the jump ball at the start of the game. They can't really be considering this, can they?

Are we going to have to include a coin toss now in our captains meetings?!?

Iowa did this for girl's basketball at one time. Not sure if that is still the case. I think that is why it was probably considered.

Peace

Do you know their reasoning?

At least, at long last, there'd finally be a reason to ask who the speaking captain is.

This post, For The Win!!!

I was told safety years ago when I heard this was a rule. I am not sure if that was the actual reason, but it was what people believed at the time.

Keep in mind Iowa had a long standing 6 on 6 basketball with some funky rules to that alone. So it does not surprise me this was a different rules set. Also Iowa still has different associations, one for boys and the other for girls. It is a weird state from how they do things IMO.

I was licensed in Iowa for 2 years in the sport of baseball. They played during the summer and it was a lot of fun. But the requirements were different than Illinois.

Peace

Perhaps safety for us as much as safety for the players. Seems like once or twice a season there's a video of an official getting clocked by an elbow during the jump ball.

But seriously, if they're worried about kids getting hurt during the jump ball, might as well cancel the whole game.

The two-shot foul should discourage fouling, as the penalty appears to be stiffer.
But honestly, the kid that misses the first in high school is likely to miss the second one...
Here's an idea: stop fouling!

I would go with visiting team gets the ball to start the game, if it was to be eliminated. In tournaments, the higher seed, meaning the #1 seed, would get the ball first.

Three Feet ...
 

True within three feet, but it's a lot easier to officiate such action if the defender is between three feet and six feet away.

Setting the distance at three feet will encourage defenders to get closer to get a count going which will also set up a situation where contact, or a held ball, or a timeout, is likely.

These situations are unlikely with a count going at six feet, where a defender may just settle for a five second closely guarded violation, and will not have to move in for the coup de grâce.

Only change I want is to make the equipment rules punishable beyond making the player change/remove the item. Force the coaches to be the fashion police instead of us.

If they have to sit an entire game because players run on the court with illegal leg sleeves, they probably won't make that mistake a second time.

I've been expecting this for years. The jump ball is an anachronistic play which no longer really has anything to do with the game. It's days were numbered once the AP arrow was introduced.

I expect the visiting team will get the first possession and the home team will get the arrow.

I would like to know to what extent, if any, are coaches held responsible for their players wearing illegal uniforms, undershirts, etc. I get the feeling that they aren't held responsible at all, and therefore policing those rules has been left to us.

Issue fines to schools whose coaches aren't abiding the rules. Making it warning the first time, then a small fine, etc... I don't care. But we have enough to think about and do for the actual game.

And if they care so much about those fashion rules, then this is the best way to avoid them being broken.

If they did go to this, I would not have to remember which way to run once a team gains possession [emoji12]

Rut mentions it, but it was a hold-over rule from their half court 6-on-6 days. For about fifteen years, they had both 5 player and 6 player schools (smaller schools mainly played 6), and after the 92-93 season they eliminated the 6 player option.

for a while, they still held on to some of the big rule differences, though.

Girls allowed the coaching box, boys did not.
Girls used a coin toss to start the game, boys did not.
On an AP throw-in, the arrow was switched as soon as the thrower had it at her disposal, boys used the NFHS rule.

I think they gave up their differences around 10 years ago, shortly after I moved from Iowa to Colorado. As Rut mentions, they still have different associations, though.

I'd expect a coin toss if they make the change.

I'm ambivalent on the issue, but I marked "no" on the survey.

I still hate the AP, but can't imagine it going away. And, while it's not particularly important in the grand scheme, I like the fact that the game starts with each team having a chance to get the ball on the jump, and I'd hate to see it go away.

BUT, with the implementation of the AP, it seems to me that the execution of the jump gets worse and worse -- the players don't really practice it because it isn't that important (though in the 8th grade team I helped coach, we did run a play off the opening jump and probably got opening layups in half the games we played because we took the jump seriously) and the referees (sorry guys) often don't seem to manage it well (last night I watched a JV game start with the players not realizing the ball was about to go up -- one jumper jumped late and the other never did, with 8 startled players around them [and these were pretty good JV teams]).

At this point, the only reason I can see to keep the jump is tradition -- so I agree it is a matter of time until it goes away, but I think it will still be a while because of the tradition.

I don't even know where to start.

I can predict who will win the jump 80 to 90% of the time.

Why should the team with the tallest player get an advantage in the process that determines the first possession?

That said, I like the opening jump....whether tossing it myself or not.

We are on the court 15 minutes prior to the game starting. Only one of us is checking the book at the 10-minute mark. Other than the captain's meeting that takes a minute or two, what else do we have to do during those 15 minutes? I'm not trying to be a wise ass, I'm serious. If officials would just take care of the uniform stuff consistently early in the season, it would eliminate most of the headaches. There would still be some teams that wouldn't figure it out, but most would. I can think of two girls' teams right now where I made them change something earlier in the season then saw them again later in the season and they were completely in line with the uniform rules. I'm not taking credit for it, but they figured it out somewhere along the line between those games.

I've heard about a half dozen coaches this season tell me that no one has made them match headbands/leg sleeves/etc all year, and these aren't coaches who I think would lie about this.

Every sport has administrative type rules like this. Football has uniform and equipment rules that the officials have to enforcd. Baseball has rules about sleeve color, etc. Just take care of it and move on. If they don't like it, they'll get over it.

For illegal UNIFORMS, the head coach gets a direct T.

Everything else such as headbands, tights, sleeves, t-shirts, etc. are PLAYER EQUIPMENT, and those rules apply.

As to penalties for illegal player equipment, currently the player(s) are simply not allowed to be on the court, including warm-ups, if they do not comply with those rules, but changes may be coming in the future - North Carolina is currently in the 2nd year of an experimental rule .....for illegal player equipment the head coach gets a direct T, just like for illegal uniforms.

That's what I get for writing here at work.

I like the bigger penalty. Just something so coaches take care of it.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

Question, maybe you don't know.

With the experimental rule, do the players get to participate with the illegal equipment at the cost of a T just like they participate with illegal uniforms at the cost of a T?

Oftentimes players are wearing shooting shirts and/or warmup pants, so the issues aren't seen until it's about time to tipoff. And when I'm getting ready to get the game going I don't want to stop the game because a headband is the wrong color.

Frankly, I didn't get into officiating to be a part of the fashion police.

Even when it's seen early and fixed without a problem, the fact that I have to deal with it is silly. Coaches don't care because there is no penalty, so the headache is ours for the most part.

What's wrong with making schools/coaches responsible?

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

Headbands can be seen early, warmup jerseys don't cover those up.

Wrist bands can come off pretty damn fast. Any hesitation from the player, get a sub. It takes 20 seconds to do that if you have to. As has been noted, deal with it early, and the problem is gone by January.

If it's an undershirt, same thing. I like the idea of adding a penalty to the arsenal, but it's not necessary. It takes 30 seconds for a player to leave the court and change. No big deal, and the kids don't like being embarrassed so it will sort out over a few games.

I didn't get into officiating to deal with score book issues, either, but it's part of the package.

Hell, I didn't get into officiating to deal with kids, either, but that's unavoidable, too. ;)

The NC powerpoint I found online wasn't expressly clear on that - maybe someone from NC can respond here? It was clear on the penalty for not enforcing the rule - 2 week suspension for the entire officials crew.

My hope is that they would still need to correct the illegal player equipment before being allowed to participate - my rationale for that is that while illegal uniforms are something that might not be easily or readily corrected, illegal player equipment is - they just take it off.

I'm still seeing it at the varsity level, and this late in the season. I'll agree it's not hard, but it's not like we're in week one of the season.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

Tevye, Fiddler On The Roof ...
 

Once upon a time the peach basket was a tradition.

Not only that, but illegal equipment also applies to dangerous equipment such as jewelry.

I had to fix this in a first round state playoff game this week.

I very rarely see illegal undershirts anymore. They are few and far between. Most of it is girl's headbands not matching their teammates or not matching arm/leg sleeves. I have not had to deal with it nearly as much in the last month as I did in the first month or so of the season. I just make it a point to look for it as soon as we get on the court and tell them immediately so they have time to fix it. I had a girls team on Monday that was wearing warm up pants and had black headbands on. I just went up to one of the players and asked if their leg sleeves matched the black headbands. She said they did so that was good enough for me for the time being. If they disrobe and someone had on something else, I could have had them change then.

Actually I hardly see any sleeve/headband issues at all. It seems like they got the memo and stopped trying to be different.

What is a problem are that everyone now wants to roll up their pants and wear them with the band down. This is an epidemic, so much to the point that now it was made a directive to correct these things by my state office.

Peace

The most(?) common illegal undershirt is the one with the logo on the back of the neck band.

A few weeks back before my GV game we noticed several very short, GJV players who's shorts were half way between their knees and ankles! Obvious hand me downs that just weren't working out too well........