The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 08, 2016, 03:34pm
APG APG is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,889
NFHS Basketball Questionnaire

Questionnaire is live

http://www.nfhs.org/sports-resource-...uestionnaires/
__________________
Chaos isn't a pit. Chaos is a ladder. Many who try to climb it fail and never get to try again. The fall breaks them. And some, given a chance to climb, they refuse. They cling to the realm, or the gods, or love. Illusions.

Only the ladder is real. The climb is all there is.

Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 08, 2016, 03:51pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Lynnwood, WA
Posts: 94
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.
__________________
WIAA basketball & Football (Snohomish County, WA)
NWAC & GNAC Women's Basketball
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 08, 2016, 04:46pm
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,747
I like that. Of course we went to 18-minute halves this season.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 08, 2016, 05:24pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 678
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.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 08, 2016, 05:55pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: West Orange, NJ
Posts: 2,583
Quote:
Originally Posted by frezer11 View Post
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.
__________________
"Everyone has a purpose in life, even if it's only to serve as a bad example."
"If Opportunity knocks and he's not home, Opportunity waits..."
"Don't you have to be stupid somewhere else?" "Not until 4."
"The NCAA created this mess, so let them live with it." (JRutledge)
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 08, 2016, 06:03pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 127
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...
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 08, 2016, 06:07pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 734
Quote:
Originally Posted by Refhoop View Post
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.)
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 08, 2016, 06:28pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: West Orange, NJ
Posts: 2,583
Quote:
Originally Posted by so cal lurker View Post
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.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Refhoop View Post
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...
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.
__________________
"Everyone has a purpose in life, even if it's only to serve as a bad example."
"If Opportunity knocks and he's not home, Opportunity waits..."
"Don't you have to be stupid somewhere else?" "Not until 4."
"The NCAA created this mess, so let them live with it." (JRutledge)
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 08, 2016, 07:03pm
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 22,435
In Her Jock ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by JetMetFan View Post
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.
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.
__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

I was in prison and you came to visit me. (Matthew 25:36)

Last edited by BillyMac; Mon Feb 08, 2016 at 07:07pm.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 08, 2016, 07:18pm
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,747
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 08, 2016, 07:25pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich View Post
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.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 08, 2016, 07:32pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: SE Ohio
Posts: 1,156
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.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 08, 2016, 07:39pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB View Post
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.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 08, 2016, 07:47pm
Show up, keep up, shut up
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 3,582
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
girls prep school game
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
held balls
You're damn right Billy.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 08, 2016, 07:57pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,233
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich View Post
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.
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.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
NFHS Questionnaire BillyMac Basketball 42 Mon Mar 02, 2015 02:37pm
Annual NFHS Basketball Rules Questionnaire grunewar Basketball 4 Sat Feb 16, 2013 10:47pm
NFHS fall sports questionnaire up.... HLin NC Football 10 Tue Nov 27, 2012 12:06pm
NFHS survey questionnaire 26 Year Gap Basketball 34 Tue Feb 21, 2012 02:38pm
2009 NFHS Football Questionnaire tjones1 Football 29 Mon Dec 28, 2009 05:50pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:51am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1