The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #31 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 15, 2018, 09:30am
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 28,057
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich View Post
I can't imagine a huge headline just to close a weird interpretation, to be honest with you.
Yes, they could have fixed that interpretation by an Editorial Change.

This clearly to me is about what the NCAA Rule was last year and the NF changing to that part of the rule.

Peace
__________________
"When the phone does not ring, the assignor is calling."
--Black

Charles Michael Mick Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #32 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 15, 2018, 10:07am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,091
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins View Post
I disagree with that. I am against the shot clock (in HS) for practical reasons, AND I also think the HS game is better without it.
Agreed.

People will say "it will stop teams from playing stall ball." How many high school teams across the country actually play this way? Just because you read one or two stories about teams holding the ball for an entire quarter doesn't mean it's the norm.

Furthermore, I would bet that most possessions in high school games (at least where I am) don't last more than 30 seconds before a try hits the rim.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich View Post
I agree. I think the whole "good of the game" argument is just a bunch of crap.

0% of NFHS decision-making should be tied to "preparing players to play at the next level."
It's similar to when people talk about doing things "for the kids." Balderdash. People that want the shot clock in high school want it because that's what the higher levels do.

The skill levels that NFHS rules are written for are encompass a much wider spectrum than higher-level rules.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge View Post
Yes, they could have fixed that interpretation by an Editorial Change.

This clearly to me is about what the NCAA Rule was last year and the NF changing to that part of the rule.
Agreed. FED seems to adopt an NCAA rule or two every offseason, so this change would be consistent with that trend.
Reply With Quote
  #33 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 15, 2018, 10:19am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Virginia
Posts: 523
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
An exception was approved to note that any player who was located in the backcourt may recover a ball that is deflected from the frontcourt by the defense.

Is this (below) what the NFHS is trying to clarify?

Basketball Rules Interpretations - 2017-18
SITUATION 7: A1, in the teams frontcourt, passes towards A2, also in the teams frontcourt. B1 deflects the ball toward Team As backcourt. The ball bounces only in Team As frontcourt before crossing the division line. While the ball is still in the air over Team As backcourt, but never having touched in Team As backcourt, A2 gains possession of the ball while standing in Team As backcourt. RULING: Backcourt violation on Team A. Team A was still in team control and caused the ball to have backcourt status. Had A2 permitted the ball to bounce in the backcourt after having been deflected by B1, there would have been no backcourt violation. (4-4-1, 4-4-3, 9-9-1)
I hope this is what the rule change is trying to fix.

If they are trying to make it so that a ball deflected by D1 that bounces off of A1 in the front court can still be recovered by A1 in the backcourt -- that seems unnecessary. I like rewarding the defense for making a good play.
And with the current rule you don't have to interpret how/why the ball got to the backcourt -- just who touched it in the FC last.
Reply With Quote
  #34 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 15, 2018, 10:42am
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 12,671
Quote:
Originally Posted by HokiePaul View Post
....
And with the current rule you don't have to interpret how/why the ball got to the backcourt -- just who touched it in the FC last.

Isn't the italicized statement exactly what you're trying to avoid in the bolded statement?

Under the current NFHS rule, you most definitely have to interpret how/why the ball got in the backcourt. With the NCAA rule, once the defense deflects the ball, you no longer have to worry about BC scenarios.
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR
Reply With Quote
  #35 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 15, 2018, 10:56am
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 28,057
Quote:
Originally Posted by HokiePaul View Post
I hope this is what the rule change is trying to fix.

If they are trying to make it so that a ball deflected by D1 that bounces off of A1 in the front court can still be recovered by A1 in the backcourt -- that seems unnecessary. I like rewarding the defense for making a good play.
And with the current rule you don't have to interpret how/why the ball got to the backcourt -- just who touched it in the FC last.
Basically, the rule change seems to solve the issue of what they feel the rule should have been or what may coaches and players thought the rule was in the first place. So it does not appear to matter anymore who touched the ball if the defense caused the deflection. I am not a total fan of the newer rule either, but that conversation can be over if this is the rule. Almost every situation there would be an argument over who tipped the ball.

Peace
__________________
"When the phone does not ring, the assignor is calling."
--Black

Charles Michael Mick Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #36 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 15, 2018, 10:58am
This IS My Social Life
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at L, T, or C
Posts: 2,134
This Is the Best Possible Wordage???

Basketball Rules Changes - 2018-19
By NFHS on May 15, 2018

1-12-1c: It shall have a deeply-pebbled, granulated surface, with horizontally shaped panels bonded tightly to the rubber carcass.

Rationale: The additional words give manufacturers a better sense of what a deeply-pebbled cover should look like.

9-9-1: A player shall not be the first to touch the ball after it has been in team control in the frontcourt, if he/she or a teammate last touched or was touched by the ball in the frontcourt before it went to the backcourt. EXCEPTION: Any player located in the backcourt may recover a ball deflected from the frontcourt by the defense.

Rationale: To ensure that a team is not unfairly disadvantaged on a deflected pass.

http://www.nfhs.org/sport…/basketbal...anges-2018-19/
__________________
Making Every Effort to Be in the Right Place at the Right Time, Looking at the Right Thing to Make the Right Call
www.myvirtualofficialsassociation.com
Reply With Quote
  #37 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 15, 2018, 11:36am
This IS My Social Life
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at L, T, or C
Posts: 2,134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freddy View Post
Basketball Rules Changes - 2018-19
By NFHS on May 15, 2018

NFHS:
EXCEPTION: Any player located in the backcourt may recover a ball deflected from the frontcourt by the defense.
NCAA-M:
Rule 4-12: Art. 5. A pass or any other loose ball in the front court that is deflected by a defensive player, which causes the ball to go into the backcourt may be recovered by either team even if the offense was the last to touch the ball before it went into the backcourt.

The only way I can see that what the NFHS came up with to make it the same as the NCAA-M is to put a huge emphasis on the word "EXCEPTION". If one doesn't, the new words appearing after don't add anything to what's there before.

Or is the NFHS trying to come up with something different?
__________________
Making Every Effort to Be in the Right Place at the Right Time, Looking at the Right Thing to Make the Right Call
www.myvirtualofficialsassociation.com
Reply With Quote
  #38 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 15, 2018, 01:33pm
This IS My Social Life
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at L, T, or C
Posts: 2,134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freddy View Post
Or is the NFHS trying to come up with something different?
Yes, I think the NFHS, with the addition of their new "EXCEPTION" is merely retracting the Interpretation that they published back in 2006-07 and then again in 2017-18:
SITUATION 7: A1, in the teams frontcourt, passes towards A2, also in the teams frontcourt. B1 deflects the ball toward Team As backcourt. The ball bounces only in Team As frontcourt before crossing the division line. While the ball is still in the air over Team As backcourt, but never having touched in Team As backcourt, A2 gains possession of the ball while standing in Team As backcourt. RULING: Backcourt violation on Team A. Team A was still in team control and caused the ball to have backcourt status. Had A2 permitted the ball to bounce in the backcourt after having been deflected by B1, there would have been no backcourt violation. (4-4-1, 4-4-3, 9-9-1)

Though many may have hoped they'd follow suit and adopt what the NCAA-M did, they didn't. Their "Exception" covers something different than NFHS.

Right?
__________________
Making Every Effort to Be in the Right Place at the Right Time, Looking at the Right Thing to Make the Right Call
www.myvirtualofficialsassociation.com
Reply With Quote
  #39 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 15, 2018, 01:52pm
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 12,671
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freddy View Post
Yes, I think the NFHS, with the addition of their new "EXCEPTION" is merely retracting the Interpretation that they published back in 2006-07 and then again in 2017-18:
SITUATION 7: A1, in the teams frontcourt, passes towards A2, also in the teams frontcourt. B1 deflects the ball toward Team As backcourt. The ball bounces only in Team As frontcourt before crossing the division line. While the ball is still in the air over Team As backcourt, but never having touched in Team As backcourt, A2 gains possession of the ball while standing in Team As backcourt. RULING: Backcourt violation on Team A. Team A was still in team control and caused the ball to have backcourt status. Had A2 permitted the ball to bounce in the backcourt after having been deflected by B1, there would have been no backcourt violation. (4-4-1, 4-4-3, 9-9-1)

Though many may have hoped they'd follow suit and adopt what the NCAA-M did, they didn't. Their "Exception" covers something different than NFHS.

Right?
We need the new verbiage to answer that.
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR
Reply With Quote
  #40 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 15, 2018, 01:53pm
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 28,057
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freddy View Post
Yes, I think the NFHS, with the addition of their new "EXCEPTION" is merely retracting the Interpretation that they published back in 2006-07 and then again in 2017-18:
SITUATION 7: A1, in the team’s frontcourt, passes towards A2, also in the team’s frontcourt. B1 deflects the ball toward Team A’s backcourt. The ball bounces only in Team A’s frontcourt before crossing the division line. While the ball is still in the air over Team A’s backcourt, but never having touched in Team A’s backcourt, A2 gains possession of the ball while standing in Team A’s backcourt. RULING: Backcourt violation on Team A. Team A was still in team control and caused the ball to have backcourt status. Had A2 permitted the ball to bounce in the backcourt after having been deflected by B1, there would have been no backcourt violation. (4-4-1, 4-4-3, 9-9-1)

Though many may have hoped they'd follow suit and adopt what the NCAA-M did, they didn't. Their "Exception" covers something different than NFHS.

Right?
Why would you create an entire exception to the rule, just to change one interpretation that was used last year as a clarification last year with backcourt rules?

I guess I am not getting why is all that necessary for an interpretation that hardly anyone knew was even there in the first place. This could be done with an editorial change.

And 9-9-1 says nothing about the interpretation that we referenced, that was only in the casebook.

Peace
__________________
"When the phone does not ring, the assignor is calling."
--Black

Charles Michael Mick Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #41 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 15, 2018, 02:23pm
This IS My Social Life
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at L, T, or C
Posts: 2,134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raymond View Post
We need the new verbiage to answer that.
The new verbiage came out this morning from NFHS:

"9-9-1: A player shall not be the first to touch the ball after it has been in team control in the frontcourt, if he/she or a teammate last touched or was touched by the ball in the frontcourt before it went to the backcourt. EXCEPTION: Any player located in the backcourt may recover a ball deflected from the frontcourt by the defense.

http://www.nfhs.org/sports-resource-...anges-2018-19/
__________________
Making Every Effort to Be in the Right Place at the Right Time, Looking at the Right Thing to Make the Right Call
www.myvirtualofficialsassociation.com
Reply With Quote
  #42 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 15, 2018, 02:29pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 11,342
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freddy View Post
Basketball Rules Changes - 2018-19
By NFHS on May 15, 2018

1-12-1c: It shall have a deeply-pebbled, granulated surface, with horizontally shaped panels bonded tightly to the rubber carcass.

Rationale: The additional words give manufacturers a better sense of what a deeply-pebbled cover should look like.

9-9-1: A player shall not be the first to touch the ball after it has been in team control in the frontcourt, if he/she or a teammate last touched or was touched by the ball in the frontcourt before it went to the backcourt. EXCEPTION: Any player located in the backcourt may recover a ball deflected from the frontcourt by the defense.

Rationale: To ensure that a team is not unfairly disadvantaged on a deflected pass.

http://www.nfhs.org/sport…/basketbal...anges-2018-19/
Looks like they're staying with the HS rule and just adding an exception to make legal what was always legal until someone came up with an erroneous interpretation that contradicted the rule. At least we don't have the silly interpretation confusing the matter any more.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #43 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 15, 2018, 02:32pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 11,342
Quote:
Originally Posted by Raymond View Post
Isn't the italicized statement exactly what you're trying to avoid in the bolded statement?

Under the current NFHS rule, you most definitely have to interpret how/why the ball got in the backcourt. With the NCAA rule, once the defense deflects the ball, you no longer have to worry about BC scenarios.
I disagree. The HS rule is and always was objective....who touched it where and in what order is all that matter.

The NCAA rule is subjective. For the NCAA rule, how much much activity after a defensive deflection is allowed before the backcourt rule is back in effect? Is it back on if the offence catches the ball, then immediately steps in the BC? Or steps in the BC after a second or two?

The NCAA rule leaves a gray area subject to interpretation, the HS doesn't.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #44 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 15, 2018, 02:33pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 11,342
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rich View Post
I can't imagine a huge headline just to close a weird interpretation, to be honest with you.
They have done it before.

It is easier to say they're changing the rule rather than admitting they had doubled down on an incorrect interpretation.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #45 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 15, 2018, 02:44pm
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 28,057
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
I disagree. The HS rule is and always was objective....who touched it where and in what order is all that matter.

The NCAA rule is subjective. For the NCAA rule, how much much activity after a defensive deflection is allowed before the backcourt rule is back in effect? Is it back on if the offence catches the ball, then immediately steps in the BC? Or steps in the BC after a second or two?

The NCAA rule leaves a gray area subject to interpretation, the HS doesn't.
How is the NCAA rule subjective? If the defense makes a play on the ball and deflects or knocks the ball away, it does not matter who it goes off of, anyone can go and get the ball without penalty. It sounds like the very same thing we are talking about here. The NF just gave one example that fits the NCAA rule.

I am sure we will need more information, but the NCAA rule uses that as an exception to the rule.

Now the problem is going to be that the NF will not take on the exact language and this will muddy the waters without extensive interpretations, but I see nothing that deals with this any different than the NCAA at this point.

Peace
__________________
"When the phone does not ring, the assignor is calling."
--Black

Charles Michael Mick Chambers (1947-2010)
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
HSM Update jkumpire Baseball 8 Thu Apr 19, 2007 09:00am
NFHS Update WestMichBlue Softball 26 Thu Feb 02, 2006 02:41pm
+POS Update Robmoz Basketball 4 Mon Dec 06, 2004 11:45pm
update A Pennsylvania Coach Basketball 11 Tue Dec 31, 2002 11:15am
Brief update ChuckElias Basketball 16 Mon Dec 23, 2002 05:38pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:59pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1