NFHS 2017-18 Rules Changes

[crosscountry55]

Tweaking the bonus rule would have been a tough sell because whether the committee liked it or not, the reality is that more than a few states have unilaterally chosen to play the game in halves.

Outside of that, some good ideas on the above list, and a few silly ones. Historically speaking, maybe one will get adopted. Maybe. The needle moves very slowly in NFHS rule making.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Altor]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

Tweaking the bonus rule would have been a tough sell because whether the committee liked it or not, the reality is that more than a few states have unilaterally chosen to play the game in halves.

The states that make up their own rules don't get a voice/vote on the rule changes for exactly this reason. If the NFHS decides to start counting team fouls by quarter, then the states play halves can make up their own rules on how to administer bonus free throws as well.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by Altor

The states that make up their own rules don't get a voice/vote on the rule changes for exactly this reason. If the NFHS decides to start counting team fouls by quarter, then the states play halves can make up their own rules on how to administer bonus free throws as well.

You're right. Adopting one's own rules without NFHS permission creates a slippery slope. Would the committee by sympathetic or apathetic to the slippery slope they might create by tweaking bonus rules? I guess we'll have to wait and see.

I knows of eight states that have shot clocks and three that play the game in halves. Of those, only RI does both. So that's at least 10 states without rules committee representation that I know of, and there are probably a few more. At what point does this start to alarm the NFHS? And what do they do about it? If you gradually kick out all of your customers, eventually you either have to improve your customer service or go out of business.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Altor

The states that make up their own rules don't get a voice/vote on the rule changes for exactly this reason. If the NFHS decides to start counting team fouls by quarter, then the states play halves can make up their own rules on how to administer bonus free throws as well.

While they do not get a turn in the regional rotation to have a representative on the NFHS rules committee, those states are not prohibited from submitting rules changes for the committee's consideration as evidenced by California submitting a change proposal this year.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

While they do not get a turn in the regional rotation to have a representative on the NFHS rules committee, those states are not prohibited from submitting rules changes for the committee's consideration as evidenced by California submitting a change proposal this year.

In addition, all of those states that modify a few rules largely still go by NFHS rules for the rest and probably have their officials buy the NFHS rule books. The states can't legally distribute the NFHS rules otherwise. Some might use NCAA rules and that is certainly their right, but they're never going to get the NCAA to change anything for them.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

Tweaking the bonus rule would have been a tough sell because whether the committee liked it or not, the reality is that more than a few states have unilaterally chosen to play the game in halves.

The NCAAM post-season NIT tournament reset the fouls at 9:59 remaining of each half. This was done during play. No stoppage needed.

It's clear to me that any states playing in halves would simply take this approach.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The NCAAM post-season NIT tournament reset the fouls at 9:59 remaining of each half. This was done during play. No stoppage needed.

It's clear to me that any states playing in halves would simply take this approach.

I hope that gimmicky mess does not spread. If you want to reset the foul count, then play by quarters.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by Raymond

I hope that gimmicky mess does not spread. If you want to reset the foul count, then play by quarters.

+1. Or honor the intent of two shots at 5, but simplify modify to two shots at 10 for games played in halves. Still gets rid of 1-and-1, which would reduce rough play and sometimes goofy penalty administration on free throws (the main reason NCAAW made their switch two years ago).

If anyone is annoyed by my trivial posts....sorry. It's April, and I'm kind of bored.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[so cal lurker]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

+1. Or honor the intent of two shots at 5, but simplify modify to two shots at 10 for games played in halves. Still gets rid of 1-and-1, which would reduce rough play and sometimes goofy penalty administration on free throws (the main reason NCAAW made their switch two years ago).

That was the rule at the AAU tournament my son just played.

I'm personally dubious about it limiting rough play. Sure, you eliminate a few free throw rebounding events, but you also lessen the consequences of fouls because it takes longer to get to bonus. Seems to me you just get different rough play from it.

(And maybe I'm biased here, too, as back in the dark ages when I played, I worked really hard on getting offensive rebounds on FTs -- which was also easier before they moved the defender a slot further from the bucket.)

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Raymond

I hope that gimmicky mess does not spread. If you want to reset the foul count, then play by quarters.

Totally agree but even the reset IMO is unnecessary.

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

Still gets rid of 1-and-1, which would reduce rough play and sometimes goofy penalty administration on free throws (the main reason NCAAW made their switch two years ago).

I still think there is a premium in making FTs. And I think you should have to make them with the idea that the other team will get the ball if you miss.

Also I think all of that would be good if we played a longer game. Thirty-Two minutes is not a lot of time. And if a team plays a certain way you will never get to 10 fouls. Now you are promoting for fouls that will not result in FTs at a certain point of the game. I just do not like that standard. I will adjust if this is a change, but I am not sure what they are trying to accomplish other than being the same as another level, when the biggest amateur level does not even use that rule or play quarters.

Peace

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Also I think all of that would be good if we played a longer game. Thirty-Two minutes is not a lot of time. And if a team plays a certain way you will never get to 10 fouls. Now you are promoting for fouls that will not result in FTs at a certain point of the game. I just do not like that standard.

WI and MN didn't change the bonus rule, but did go to 36 minutes in recent years. I'd be willing to bet what you pointed out was part of that calculus. Plus....as both a player and fan, 32 minutes goes by way too fast. You can barely get to and from the concession stand without missing a third of the game. I like 36 minutes a lot.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I will adjust if this is a change, but I am not sure what they are trying to accomplish other than being the same as another level, when the biggest amateur level does not even use that rule or play quarters.

I'm not the PC police, but you're lucky there aren't too many female officials on this forum. That's a provocative thing to say.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

I'm not the PC police, but you're lucky there aren't too many female officials on this forum. That's a provocative thing to say.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I dont see it as provacative.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

I'm not the PC police, but you're lucky there aren't too many female officials on this forum. That's a provocative thing to say.

If they were offended, so what? The reality is that most people pay attention to Men's basketball and the NBA. The Women's side is spending too much time trying to be like the WNBA which is run by the NBA. I do not think that appeals to many that support high school sports. And I have to listen all year about why the Women's college does something and we should adopt it. Well I do not want NBA rules to be NF rules, so if this is a problem for Women's officials for me or others to not accept those rules, so be it.

Peace

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

I'm not the PC police, but you're lucky there aren't too many female officials on this forum. That's a provocative thing to say.

Am I the only on who has no idea where this came from?