NFHS Update

[JRutledge]

I do not consider the first touch, last touch BC to be subjective. It is a judgment call because you have to see it, but it is not always clear.

Either way, the NCAA took away an element of that call and the most controversial part too. We will just have to see. But then again this is just arguing over an irrelevant point anyway. Why does anyone care about what is subjective or not?

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do not consider the first touch, last touch BC to be subjective.

Good, because it isn't.....it is primarily objective with the possible exception of determining whether there was team control or not.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It is a judgment call because you have to see it, but it is not always clear.

A judgement call IS a subjective call. Judgement is not seeing or not seeing, it is seeing and having the option to decide whether if was an infraction or not....aka subjective.

Not seeing is just not seeing.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

A judgment call IS a subjective call. Judgment is ... seeing and having the option to decide whether if was an infraction or not....aka subjective.

For example, ruling a dribble to determine team control (which can, and often is, independent of a backcourt determination).

Right next to the definition of subjective in the dictionary is a picture of Camron Rust. Well, not really, but you get my point.

Also, why isn't there a judge in judgment? Don't you think that there should be? After all, that's what judges get paid for, to judge, and to make judgments.

[JRutledge]

Whatever you call it does not matter. All that matters when does this new exception apply and when does it not apply. If we find out they took on the NCAA Rule (which they are using similar language) with this exception, then that should clear up many things. If they want to make exceptions to an exception, then we are right back to where we were before, but for different reasons.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... similar language ...

Old NFHS Language:

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.

New NFHS language:

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.

I'm interested to see if there is a new NFHS casebook play, or an new NFHS annual interpretation.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Old NFHS Language:

9-9-1: A player shall not be the first to touch the ball after it has been in player and 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.

New NFHS language:

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.

I'm interested to see if there is a new NFHS casebook play, or an new NFHS annual interpretation.

I was not talking about the NF. I was talking about the NF using similar language from the NCAA.

9-12-4 and 9-12-5.

Art. 4. A player shall not be the first to touch the ball in his backcourt (with any part of his body, voluntarily or involuntarily) when the ball came from the front court while that player’s team was in team control and that player or his teammate was the last to touch the ball before it went into the backcourt. (Exception: See Rule 9-12.5)

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.

BTW, sounds like they changed the rule as I had been stating. This is more than just a change of one unusual interpretation. That is what Raymond and I have been saying all along.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I was not talking about the NF. I was talking about the NF using similar language from the NCAA.

I was 100% fully aware of that. I was just offering the new NFHS language so that you guys that do both college and high school can compare the two.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... If we find out they took on the NCAA Rule (which they are using similar language)

I offered the new language to answer your "if we find out" statement. We did "find out", and it appears that the NFHS didn't take on the entire NCAA rule language, just the added exception statement (assuming that your 9-12-4 and 9-12-5 post above is the NCAA rule).

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

This is more than just a change of one unusual interpretation.

Please offer how the NFHS rule change impacts a play other than the "unusual interpretation".

(Note: I love JRutledge's adjective "unusual" to describe the (hopefully) now extinct NFHS interpretation. Dinosaurs were also "unusual", but I wouldn't want a Tyrannosaurus Rex hanging out in my backyard. As such, I never liked this "unusual interpretation", and would love to see it relegated to an "unusual interpretation" museum.)

(Another note: There was a Black Bear in my frontyard last week, common for many of you, but very rare and certainly "unusual" for my little part of my little corner of Connecticut. It was a first for me, and I was totally fascinated, but also a little scared, I made sure that the front door of my house was unlocked and available for me to make a quick entrance if needed.)

Basketball Rules Interpretations - 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 it 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)

New 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.

[Pantherdreams]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

.

Right next to the definition of subjective in the dictionary is a picture of Camron Rust. Well, not really, but you get my point.

.

Wouldn't the definition be more effective if it was a picture that could arguably be Camron Rust?