NFHS Preseason Guide 2018 -- a problem

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Not only is this wrong, it's also the wrong rule reference. 10-6-3 concerns playing a player after that player has been disqualified.

10-6-4 is closer to what they wrote, it concerns a technical foul charged to the head coach for illegal UNIFORMS, not illegal equipment or illegal apparel like they posit here.

AremRed,
I just did the online rules meeting and was shocked that they allowed that seemingly erroneous NFHS PowerPoint slide, attached, to remain in the presentation, designating a direct technical on the coach for any apparel infraction. Do you have any connections from whom you can confirm whether or not they actually want us to do and teach that or if it's the obvious error that we suspect it is which they'll be correcting with a followup dispatch of some sort? I've gotta teach this rule next week.

[griblets]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Seems that someone jumped the gun in an article which appears in the 2018 preseason guide and this has resulted in a problem. I believe that one of the rule changes under consideration, but ultimately rejected this past off-season was to make coaches accountable for illegal equipment by creating a penalty of a technical foul charged to the head coach should a player be found to be wearing an illegal item.
Well, here is what has been printed in the preseason guide:
"Coaches shall not allow players to wear illegal equipment or apparel. Should a team member participate while wearing illegal equipment or apparel, the penalty is a technical foul charged to the head coach as described in Rule 10-6-3 Pen. upon discovery."

Unfortunately, this isn't true. Illegal equipment and apparel are not the same as an illegal uniform and don't result in the same penalty.

Not only did this erroneous information make it in the 2018 preseason guide, but also in the Simplified & Illustrated rules book, pages 14 & 15.

"Simplified..." oh, the irony!

[griblets]

Originally Posted by Freddy

I was informed by one our training brethren in Hawaii that the NFHS sent out corrections to that erroneous part of their PowerPoint. Will attach it as soon as I can get it downloaded.

I just accepted the role of rules interpreter in our local association. This issue is already causing problems at our first meeting. I'm very interested in an official correction that I can hopefully share at our next meeting.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Freddy

... designating a direct technical on the coach for any apparel infraction.

Originally Posted by griblets

Not only did this erroneous information make it in the 2018 preseason guide, but also in the Simplified & Illustrated rules book, pages 14 & 15.

And the hits just keep on coming.

[griblets]

In preparation for our association meeting tonight, I called NFHS about pages 14 and 15 in the Simplified and Illustrated rules book. I spoke with Theresia Wynns who confirmed that the pages are in error, that there is no technical foul for apparel, only illegal uniforms. She confirmed that the rule has not changed regarding apparel and the associated penalty.

She mentioned that the book was published before the correction was made, but the slides have been corrected. I should have asked for a link to the corrected slides, because I can't find them!

FHSAA (Florida) still has posted the old slides. That will be my next call.

[frezer11]

Not as important as an incorrect ruling, but in the rule book on the 3rd page in from the front, the Points of Emphasis, #4 is listed as "Officiating Professionalism and Use of Proper Technology." They then double down on their incorrect statement of Technology rather than Terminology in the comments section on page 69. This in no way affects how we will call the game, but man, who is proofreading these things?? Drives me crazy, put a little pride in what you do!

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by frezer11

Not as important as an incorrect ruling, but in the rule book on the 3rd page in from the front, the Points of Emphasis, #4 is listed as "Officiating Professionalism and Use of Proper Technology." They then double down on their incorrect statement of Technology rather than Terminology in the comments section on page 69. This in no way affects how we will call the game, but man, who is proofreading these things?? Drives me crazy, put a little pride in what you do!

Similarly, while using Proper Technology, you and I want to be careful to use the term "Fumble (NOT Muff)".
Even though the term "muff" is used in the Casebook in 4.15.1B, 4.44A, 9.1.1, and 9.2.1B.
...et al...

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Freddy

Similarly, while using Proper Technology, you and I want to be careful to use the term "Fumble (NOT Muff)".
Even though the term "muff" is used in the Casebook in 4.15.1B, 4.44A, 9.1.1, and 9.2.1B.
...et al...

I don't know what the reference your'e talking about says, but "muff" is a valid term and is different than a fumble.

Fumble: A ball that slips from a players grasp, accidentally. A fumble can only happen to a player already holding the ball.

Muff: A ball that a player unsuccessful catches when trying to end a dribble or catch a pass....happens to a player who is not holding the ball.



It is a basic English word whose natural meaning is all we need. There is no need for the book to define every word. Some are fine as they are.

muff verb
muffed; muffing; muffs
Definition of muff (Entry 2 of 3)
transitive verb

1 : to handle awkwardly
2 : to fail to hold (a ball) when attempting a catch

Does the book define what a hand is?

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I don't know what the reference your'e talking about says . . .

It's in the POE encouraging "Proper Technology" on p.73 of the new Rules Book. Without knowing that POE, how can you be sure the technology you use is actually correct? You'll probably be using phrases like, "...after Team A established player control", ...when the ball missed the rim", and a host of other improper technological terms that shouldn't be found in your vocabulary.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

... "muff" is a valid term ...

Everybody knows what a muff is.