Agree.

The quickest way to improve safety and reduce charges under the basket is to call the charges under the basket when they happen....all without a rule change. The reason it becomes a safety issue is some officials refuse to call it and that encourages the offense to fly into defenders because they know they can.

For players, it is a generally accepted requirement and they need to get warm for reasons that do not govern anyone else. Strangely, many do not wear them at halftime. I agree, that if we wear jackets before the game, then they should be worn coming out of halftime.

Or, just eliminate them.;)

Practical Reasons ...
 

Many of us wear our jackets pregame for up to fifteen minutes. We don't spend the entire ten minute halftime on the floor. Here in my little corner of Connecticut, we normally get back on the court with about a minute to go in the intermission, with, or without, the three minute warning. No need for a jacket to keep warm for a minute, or two.

I know guys that keep their jackets on for warmth in the locker room during almost the entire halftime intermission.

I wear mine pregame, not for the warmth, but because it looks good.

If I forget and leave the jacket at the table prior to the halftime intermission, I can still grab it after the final buzzer.

If I wear my jacket on the court through the entire halftime intermission, and I forget and leave the jacket at the table post game, I may have to make the long trek back to the school from home once I discover my jacket is missing. Hopefully it will still be there after a few days in the locker room.

We must agree to disagree here. The reason why charges occur under the basket is because defenders are able to legally set up there and get rewarded for it by earning the foul call. If a defender must set up at some distance from the basket, then that challenges him to contest the shot and get a rebound should the shot miss, not be a human shield to take away a score at the expense of potential serious injuries to either player. This would also allow the offensive player the time and distance to react before he leaves his feet on anew attempt to score at the basket.

On a fast break, a player who is running full steam might not be able to come to a stop quickly enough to avoid a player who shows up under the basket. Because the player had position, it was a charge, but this call benefited neither the defender nor the offensive player from a safety perspective. If a defender sets up farther away from the basket, the ball handler might notice him sooner and be able to avoid him more quickly.

A similar scenario might occur when a defender rotates over to help a player who is beaten inside the lane, and ends up directly in an offensive player's path. Because time and distance does not apply to the ballhandler, he is being penalized for being unable to stop his movement, not for executing any specific illegal actions. The restricted area rule is specifically written to disallow any illegal actions by the offensive player (unnatural use of the hand, arm, leg, or knee, a distinct pushoff, etc.), while not penalizing him for his momentum.

The restricted area was created in the NBA, NCAA, and FIBA to avoid these exact scenarios, as well as possible variations on these scenarios. Perhaps, if the NFHS is focused on risk minimization and improving player safety, it is time to add this change to NFHS as well. There is no reason from a basketball standpoint for a defender to risk injury by being in a position where it is difficult to contest a shot, rebound, or perform another basketball play. The offense also benefits, because it becomes easier for them to drive legally to the basket.

In my area, we wear our jackets for pregame, and re-appear on the floor with 3 minutes remaining in halftime at most. If it is a subvarsity game with a shortened halftime, we might only be there with 1 minute left in halftime. Because we are on the floor for a very short time in halftime, and our gyms are usually warm, we do not wear our jackets for halftime, although we retrieve our jackets before we retire to the locker room for halftime. I would not abolish the jacket, because every level of basketball uses pre-game jackets. If NBA officials wear jackets before their games, and it is the policy of my association(s) to wear jackets, I will be wearing mine before my scholastic games.

ilyazhito = Jay Bilas

And what if your association(s) got rid of jackets? Are you still going to wear one "because NBA officials do"?

These are the kinds of comments that cause people to bat an eye. Worry about doing NBA things when you make it to the NBA.

Fixed that for you.
Re:Jay Bilas, how is that relevant to the current discussion?

Call more PC fouls and amazingly players start pulling up more. So you can disagree if you like, but been doing this long enough or been calling enough PC fouls in games where somehow the players adjust. ;)

Peace

Player Control Fouls ...
 

Maybe a new NFHS Point of Emphasis? Maybe one with some teeth and a lot of publicity? And followup education by state, and local, associations?

But, would that really help? Maybe it's worth a try?

What officials wear or do not wear is not up the state or organization. We have states that have officials in all kinds of uniforms with different styles. Not sure why we think that what the NF says (And no state has to follow any mechanics or uniform requirements anyway) matters.

Peace

They could do this for sure but that would not change what I do and what many do that teach officiating. We call charges in my world. A POE is great, but it does not change what the rules have been saying for years.

Peace

Connecticut Problems ...
 

I can't speak regarding other areas, but we've been told by our local, and state, interpreters, and by IAABO International observers, that we have three main problems in regard to player control fouls being called here in Connecticut.

1) When a train wreck occurs in the paint, officials are more likely to call an incorrect blocking foul than a incorrect player control foul (or an incorrect team control foul in the case of a ball handler that passes).

2) When a train wreck occurs in the paint, officials are often likely to pass (no whistle) on close, really tough, calls rather than charge either a blocking foul, or a player control foul (or team control foul).

In other words, the default calls in Connecticut for close, really tough, train wrecks that occur in the paint seem to be blocking fouls, or nothing, and these default calls are often incorrect.

3) When a train wreck occurs in the paint, trail officials (two person Connecticut) seldom, if ever, make a call, most likely because they don't want to make a call outside their primary coverage area, or because they pass (no whistle) on close, really tough, calls rather than charge either a blocking foul or a player control foul (or team control foul).

In train wreak situations in the paint, we have been advised (over and over again) to observe the defense, that if a defensive player legally establishes, and legally maintains (including legal movements) a legal guarding position, to call a player control foul (or a team control foul), especially with contact on the defender's torso, and if otherwise, call the blocking foul.

We've also been advised (over and over again) that the trail should offer help in such train wreck situations in a normal "help manner", wait a split second for the lead to make a call, if the lead doesn't, put a whistle on the play using the guidelines in the paragraph above. Of course, use patience, good eye contact, and good communication, to avoid "blarges".

We've been advised (over and over again) that we don't have to be 100% sure to put a whistle on these dangerous plays. 51% should suffice for an "educated guess" whistle. No whistle means that we'll be wrong on train wrecks almost 100% of the time.

Put a whistle on such plays, use strong, confident looking signals, verbalize with a strong, confident voice, and be confident that your game management skills will keep the coaches under control.

Our local interpreter of many years ago use to say, "The best wrong call is a strong wrong call".

Myself, I call player control fouls whenever a defender in a legal guarding position is displaced by an offensive player. Unlike many officials, I do not default to "block" as my call when it is uncertain what happened. I tend to call PC fouls when the offensive player runs through a defensive player, even if the LGP status is undetermined (but not when a player is out of bounds). For me, being in the restricted area would be analogous to being out of bounds, since one cannot establish legal guarding position out of bounds, so that might be an analogy that could help officials if the restricted area were to be adopted.

However, my #1 desire for a rule change would be the shot clock. A restricted area would be more like #2 or #3, along with modifying the bonus rules to have the offended team awarded 2 free throws starting with the 5th foul in each quarter. 2 shots after 5 would be easier to administer than the current mishmash of 1-and-1 after 7 and 2 after 10 in a half.

The only thing the RA would lead to, in my area, is incorrect player control fouls and coaches going nuts. We have 20- through 40-year officials that haven't been to a camp or done any self-improvement in decades and aren't trained to officiate from the feet up. They're not going to change overnight and some never will change.

There is nothing the RA can solve at the high school level that can't be solved by correctly adjudicating block/charge plays under the basket as the rule is now, and defaulting to PC on 50/50 plays.

A solution whose only problem is "because college."

Also, NFHS POEs are a bunch of hooey.

How many times was hand checking a POE before they realized people still weren't calling it and a rule change was needed?

What about the "team control during a throw-in is only for foul purposes" mess that seems to be in there every year but people still can't get it right and they won't rewrite the rule?

And what about the one about PA announcers a few years ago? Who actually enforces that?