2019 NFHS Questionnaire

[Rich]

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/PCPHG9T


PART I – Checkup on present 2018-19 rules – Were the following rule changes satisfactory?

1. The ball shall have a deeply-pebbled, granulated surface, with horizontally shaped panels bonded tightly to the rubber carcass.

2. EXCEPTION: Any player located in the backcourt may recover a ball deflected from the frontcourt by the defense.


PART II – Observations – Have you observed any of the following this year?

1. An increase in rolling waistbands.

2. An increase in permission requests for religious attire waivers.

3. Lack of adherence to uniform rules (especially jersey).

4. Headbands that are wider than 2 inches.

5. Schools having problems finding competent individuals to occupy the required positions at the scorer's table (i.e., official scorer, official timer) at boys varsity contests.

6. Schools having problems finding competent individuals to occupy the required positions at the scorer's table (i.e., official scorer, official timer) at girls varsity contests.

7. Schools having problems finding competent individuals to occupy the required positions at the scorer's table (i.e., official scorer, official timer) at below varsity contests.

8. Inconsistent application of player uniform restrictions.

9. An increase in secondary defenders drawing player-control fouls near the basket.

10. An increase in excessive negative behavior by players or coaches after fouls have been committed.

11. An increase by officials to not make calls during contests, leading to more physical play (i.e., “passing on calls”).

12. An increase in sportsmanship issues toward officials.

13. An increase in time spent at the free-throw line.

14. An increase in number of visiting jerseys in light grey, silver, old gold, yellow, etc.

15. An increase in the number of hand-check fouls being called.

16. An increase in the number of games with one team possessing the ball for longer than 30 seconds before attempting a shot.

17. An increase in the number of three-point shots being attempted.

18. Traveling not being called.

19. An increase in the number of timer or scorer errors due to distraction or inexperience.

20. An increase in the number of times officials must stop the game to correct time/score.


PART III – About the rules for 2019-20 – Would you favor?

1. Permitting a shot clock for high school basketball.

2. Permitting a 35-second shot clock to be used at the varsity level in all contests after a specific phase-in period, with lower-level contests determined by the state associations.

3. By state association adoption, permitting a 35-second shot clock to be used at the varsity level in all contests, with lower-level contests determined by the state associations and the home state determining if a clock will be used in games involving teams from other states.

4. Eliminating restrictions on undergarment color including undershirts, sweat bands and other items.

5. Clarifying the rule regarding uniform shorts by stating that the manner in which shorts are worn, specifically the waistband, is determined by the player, provided the drawstring doesn't create a risk to the player or others, the restrictions on manufacturer logos are followed, and the wearing doesn't compromise the proper covering of the genital region.

6. Including a restricted arc in the lane to assist officials in making player-control foul calls.

7. Resetting the team foul count after each quarter and shooting two bonus free throws beginning with a team’s fifth foul each quarter.

8. Eliminating one-and-one bonus situations and awarding two free throws on the fifth and all subsequent fouls in each quarter.

9. Allowing a team warning for the first non-compliance offense of the (3-5) apparel rules when a team member who is attempting to enter the game or a player is discovered wearing non-compliant apparel.

10. Charging a team technical foul for non-compliance with (3-5) apparel rules, penalized when discovered while a team member is attempting to enter the game or discovered when a team member is playing.

11. Charging the head coach with a direct technical foul each time a member of his or her team member is discovered attempting to enter the game or playing while wearing non-compliant apparel.

12. Not requiring that a head coach be required to remain seated after the first direct or indirect foul that currently results in loss of coaching box privileges.

13. Starting each overtime period per the alternating-possession held ball arrow.

14. Allowing a head coach to request a time-out for substitution only.

15. By state association adoption, reducing the amount of team time-outs in games involving electronic media in which in media time-outs are requested.

16. Adding administrative technical fouls to include: scorebook leaving the table, official scorer wearing black-and-white striped shirt.

17. No “closely guarded” calls when dribbling.

18. Changing the closely guard distance to 3 feet.

19. Allowing dunking during pregame.

20. Increasing the width of the headband to allow up to 3 inches.

21. Allowing the coach or captain to request a defensive match-up.

22. Requiring the designated home team to wear dark jerseys and the designated visiting team to wear white jerseys.

23. Creating a rule that holds the head coach accountable for players wearing illegal apparel.

[SC Official]

We all know that no more than a handful of these will get adopted or considered.

If I could have one of these it would easily be eliminating the seatbelt rule.

Shot clock and RA are solutions looking for problems.

Yes, eliminate color rules. I'm against any proposal of a technical foul/warning/etc. for fashion police stuff. Direct T on the head coach? Good luck getting officials to call that.

I don't care about resetting fouls each quarter. I'd actually prefer the HS game go to halves nationwide, but that won't happen.

Yes, allow dunking in warm-ups.

[ilyazhito]

For the first proposed change on the questionnaire, the shot clock... drumroll ... GIVE ME A HELL, GIVE ME A YEAH! Stand up right now!
If I was only allowed to make 5 changes I would go shot clock, 2 shot bonus on 5th foul each quarter, no dunking ban in warmups, no closely guarded on a dribble, and 3 ft closely guarded distance.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I was irritated that there was not a Comment Section.

Specifically:

Part II, Question #9: Have you observed any of the following this year? An increase in secondary defenders drawing player-control fouls near the basket.

The inclusion of this question indicates that the person or committee does not understand the Fundamental Principle of the Guarding Rule: That A1 should expect to be Guarded from the instant that he/she gains PC of the Ball and to be Guarded continuously until he/she no longer has PC of the Ball. The FP means that if A1 eludes B1 that he/she expect to be immediately Guarded by B2. The FP means that there is no such thing as a "secondary defender".

This lack of knowledge of the FP is why the NCAA Men's and Women's Committees added such nonsense as: 1) the RA and 2) the definition of "secondary defender", as well as the Women's Committee defining an area of the Court as the Lower Defensive Block.

I am stepping down from my soap box and going to bed now. Good night all and sweet dreams!

MTD, Sr.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I was irritated that there was not a Comment Section.



Specifically:



Part II, Question #9: Have you observed any of the following this year? An increase in secondary defenders drawing player-control fouls near the basket.



The inclusion of this question indicates that the person or committee does not understand the Fundamental Principle of the Guarding Rule: That A1 should expect to be Guarded from the instant that he/she gains PC of the Ball and to be Guarded continuously until he/she no longer has PC of the Ball. The FP means that if A1 eludes B1 that he/she expect to be immediately Guarded by B2. The FP means that there is no such thing as a "secondary defender".



This lack of knowledge of the FP is why the NCAA Men's and Women's Committees added such nonsense as: 1) the RA and 2) the definition of "secondary defender", as well as the Women's Committee defining an area of the Court as the Lower Defensive Block.



I am stepping down from my soap box and going to bed now. Good night all and sweet dreams!



MTD, Sr.

The concept of a secondary defender exists in HS basketball and is covered directly in the mechanics manual.

The momentum is there - I predict there will be a restrictied area in NFHS rules in the next 3-5 years and a shot clock will be blessed -- by state association -- adoption in a similar timeframe.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[UNIgiantslayers]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

For the first proposed change on the questionnaire, the shot clock... drumroll ... GIVE ME A HELL, GIVE ME A YEAH! Stand up right now!

I am strongly against a shot clock. I haven’t been on a game in a couple years where it was necessary. Not to mention that’s one more major thing for us to worry about, one more major thing that will get screwed up at the table. This is a solution looking for a problem.

[Stat-Man]

The NFHS committee seems determined to make the HS game more like college in light of recent year proposals and rule changes - especially those proposals that haven't been adopted apparently reappearing again this year.


If they really want to bring something from the college game, how about giving us officials some of the expanded signals that are more descriptive and more appropriate for certain calls such as:

• Multiple touches/two hands on a ball handler.
• POV violation (commonly known here as "The Frankenstein")
• Chucking a cutter
• Hit to the head
• Hooking
• Staying or going away for a rebounding foul
• etc.

And it also seems every time NFHS tweaks the Fashion Police rules into something that makes sense it later decides to make wholesale changes that create more confusion than what existed previously.


Must of the questions got a verbal "Why?" or "Who cares?" as I read them. Too bad those weren't answer options.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

My shot clock experience:

1) Women's college basketball (NAGWS and NCAA Women's) from 1974 to 2008,

2) Men's jr. college/NAIA and NCAA Div. III jr. var.) from 1993 to 2008,

3) Girls' H.S. (CIF) from 1982-84, and

4) USA Basketball (FIBA) from 1992 to 2002 (1999 Special Olympics World Summer Games).


I had absolutely no problem officiating games using a Shot Clock. That said, I do not like a Shot Clock. Lets start from January 01, 1950, just in the United States and Canada alone, there have been millions upon millions basketball games played at the H.S. level, men's college level (pre-Shot Clock era), and AAU and YBOA youth tournaments. The number of "slow down" games as they are called are too insignificant to make the Shot Clock a necessity.

Every time a "slow down" game makes the news there is an out cry for the need for a Shot Clock. There is no need for a Shot Clock at the H.S. and youth level and that includes FIBA Rules, and personally, I do not see the need for a Shot Clock in either men's and women's college but that is neither here nor there as far as I am concerned.

I guess I am old school when I say that I see no problem with a team taking the air out of the Ball at the end of the game to preserve the win.

Just the two cents of an old man, LOL.

MTD, Sr.

[JRutledge]

Overall take away, it is clear that someone is considering penalizing the coach for uniform violations like waistbands. I think that is the only way this can be resolved. Put this on the coaches and if they coaches get penalized, then it will stop. Coaches act like they have no idea now what players are wearing. I wish ultimately this was out of our hands, but something needs to be done if there are going to be rules about what players wear.

I also really am not feeling this talk about a shot clock. I work enough college games where this is always an issue and we have no monitor to resolve these problems. And in many cases when we have an issue, there is a play-by-play record or even some media that can help us correct such issues. I really think this is going to be a disaster at the high school level. And please do not tell me that this works well in your area and maybe there are only a handful of schools using them. In HS this would be all over the place potentially and more games to find out all the mistakes or problems. Often at the college level, it is not someone that is very skilled or even paid very well to do the shot clock. We will have issues where someone loses a big playoff game because of some shot clock mistake.

Peace

Yet AGAIN the NFHS ignores the most important rules changes, which I have tried submitting through my state (the only "legit" way to submit rules changes), instead opting for lesser changes. The most important changes are, in order:

1. Changing the goaltending rule to mimic NBA/NCAA-M/NCAA-W/FIBA (every f-ing major rule set) where you cannot block the ball once it has touched the backboard. This is an easy rule change, easy to call, easy to write, and it blows my mind they haven't done it.

2. Eliminating the INANE "resumption of play procedure". Putting the ball down is an EASY way to piss off players, coaches, and fans and even if the team is extremely late makes the ref crew look terrible. Give us the option to assess a delay-of-game warning like every other reasonable rule set out there.

3. Eliminating the need for a coach to sit down after a direct or indirect technical foul. I get the reasoning but it pisses off the coaches and makes refs a) less likely to call technical fouls on the coach/bench and b) less likely to have the balls and make the coach sit after the tech. And even if they are told to sit they are terrible at remembering and almost never get a second one for standing.

4. Point of emphasis for schools properly marking coaching box and officials enforcing it. I have seen SO MANY games this year with the floor not marked properly, not all the chairs inside the team area, coaches on the floor yelling at officials, coaches camping at halfcourt to coach offense/defense on other side of the floor, and assistant coaches standing and in one case in my game coming out of the head coaching box to call a play at half court. I heard many times this season "you're the only one to enforce this all year" and that's wrong.

There are other ones: delayed violation for player running OOB, re-subbing once the ball has become live instead of sit-a-tick, requiring two horns for replacements intervals and officials calling techs when coaches slow roll a replacement sub, restricted area, shot clock (gonna have way more stoppages due to shitty operators), changing full timeouts to 75 seconds, allowing the headbands with extensions for girls (so dumb that pro and college allow it yet it's a "safety issue" in HS), clarifying the team control rule for fouls during throw-ins only.

But I digress.

[Freddy]

In our state it's up to the representatives of the schools sitting on the Representative Council to approve whatever changes come down from above. And the schools in our state are very disinclined to adopt what most here consider unfunded mandates ordered by the state but paid for by the schools. In this category would fit the shot clock. Given the fact that the average time of team control before a shot goes up now is about 7.34 seconds, the last thing they'll want a device installed to slow the teams down, which is what the shot clock would do, I estimate. The typical team on the floor now is so heavily compelled to play at a pace so far above their skill level as it is. I can't imagine the chaos that would develop beyond the chaos that's already prevalent from the adoption of a system to compel them to rush themselves even more.
My $.02. (From someone who has zero influence over the issue anyway.)

[Rich]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Yet AGAIN the NFHS ignores the most important rules changes, which I have tried submitting through my state (the only "legit" way to submit rules changes), instead opting for lesser changes. The most important changes are, in order:



1. Changing the goaltending rule to mimic NBA/NCAA-M/NCAA-W/FIBA (every f-ing major rule set) where you cannot block the ball once it has touched the backboard. This is an easy rule change, easy to call, easy to write, and it blows my mind they haven't done it.



2. Eliminating the INANE "resumption of play procedure". Putting the ball down is an EASY way to piss off players, coaches, and fans and even if the team is extremely late makes the ref crew look terrible. Give us the option to assess a delay-of-game warning like every other reasonable rule set out there.



3. Eliminating the need for a coach to sit down after a direct or indirect technical foul. I get the reasoning but it pisses off the coaches and makes refs a) less likely to call technical fouls on the coach/bench and b) less likely to have the balls and make the coach sit after the tech. And even if they are told to sit they are terrible at remembering and almost never get a second one for standing.



4. Point of emphasis for schools properly marking coaching box and officials enforcing it. I have seen SO MANY games this year with the floor not marked properly, not all the chairs inside the team area, coaches on the floor yelling at officials, coaches camping at halfcourt to coach offense/defense on other side of the floor, and assistant coaches standing and in one case in my game coming out of the head coaching box to call a play at half court. I heard many times this season "you're the only one to enforce this all year" and that's wrong.



There are other ones: delayed violation for player running OOB, re-subbing once the ball has become live instead of sit-a-tick, requiring two horns for replacements intervals and officials calling techs when coaches slow roll a replacement sub, restricted area, shot clock (gonna have way more stoppages due to shitty operators), changing full timeouts to 75 seconds, allowing the headbands with extensions for girls (so dumb that pro and college allow it yet it's a "safety issue" in HS), clarifying the team control rule for fouls during throw-ins only.



But I digress.

Your #3 is on the list and I'm with you. I'd remove the seatbelt rule after a technical in a heartbeat.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by AremRed

3. Eliminating the need for a coach to sit down after a direct or indirect technical foul. I get the reasoning but it pisses off the coaches and makes refs a) less likely to call technical fouls on the coach/bench and b) less likely to have the balls and make the coach sit after the tech. And even if they are told to sit they are terrible at remembering and almost never get a second one for standing.

As the currently longest sitting member of this Forum, I respectfully disagree. Why? Because the loss of the Coaching Box has been in the Rules for almost as long as I have been officiating. I understand your frustration, but I have never really cared if the HC was upset that he lost the Coaching Box because he/she has only one person to blame: Himself/herself! HCs know what the Rule is; they just want to complain about another inequity that the Officials have imposed upon him/her.

MTD, Sr.

[SC Official]

A seatbelted coach (and us having to inform him he's been seatbelted) doesn't make the game better in any way. Too often the conversation telling the coach he has to sit turns hostile. Yes, that might not be our fault, but it's wholly unnecessary to have to treat the coach like he's a preschooler in timeout.

There's absolutely no good reason for this rule, and quite frankly I think it has minimal if any influence on how coaches behave.

[Kansas Ref]

Originally Posted by SC Official

A seatbelted coach (and us having to inform him he's been seatbelted) doesn't make the game better in any way. Too often the conversation telling the coach he has to sit turns hostile. Yes, that might not be our fault, but it's wholly unnecessary to have to treat the coach like he's a preschooler in timeout.

There's absolutely no good reason for this rule, and quite frankly I think it has minimal if any influence on how coaches behave.

*And added to this, the prospect of us having to constantly monitor if Coach happens to stand up during the game after having been seat-belted. I've had Coaches stand up, catch themselves, and sit back down quickly during a close game--but not out of outright deficance to us, but rather just as an involuntary response. It's more of a distraction to us officials.

Even had a scoretable woman come tell me during the fourth qtr of a close game (and I paraphrase): "Mr. Referee, I saw Coach Smith stand up to shout out directions once when you and your referees were focused on the game, just thought I'd let you know." I just thanked here and let it go, honestly.