2019-20 NFHS Rules Changes

[Pantherdreams]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

The way we've been interpreting this (for more than just several years) is exactly as Ms. Wynns noted, that hair control devices go around the hair only, while headbands go around the entire head.

If it's prewrap around the entire head, it's a headband and is under color restrictions.

If it's prewrap only around some hair (pony tail holder), it's a hair control device, and is not under any color restrictions.

(Its like bad trip/ flash back)

Right...

So if player x has their hair in a bun. One or two hair restraint devices around the top knot to keep it secure.

Then takes a roll of pro wrap. Wraps a piece around their head and ties it off then rolls it up into and through their hairline to trap bangs, fly away hair from lower in bun (beacuse layering is thing). Is that a head band they've pushed up into their hair or a hair control device holding some of the hair their other hair control device doesn't that happens to go around their head?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

So if player has their hair in a bun. One or two hair restraint devices around the top knot to keep it secure. Then takes a roll of pre wrap. Wraps a piece around their head and ties it off then rolls it up into and through their hairline to trap bangs, fly away hair from lower in bun (because layering is thing). Is that a head band they've pushed up into their hair or a hair control device holding some of the hair their other hair control device doesn't that happens to go around their head?

Way above my pay grade.

Ask Warren Beatty (Young'uns can check out "Warren Beatty Shampoo" on the Google, or Carly Simon You're So Vain" on the You Tube).

[LRZ]

Billy, please set yourself some posting limit per day.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by LRZ

Billy, please set yourself some posting limit per day.

I could have replied to Pantherdreams seriously, or facetiously.

I guess that I chose poorly (apologies to the Grail Knight).

Fashion issues are often decided on the local and/or state level.

What Ms. Wynns says about headbands and hair control devices (hair-control device goes around the hair only, while a headband goes around the entire head) may, or may not, mean anything on the local and/or state level.

[ilyazhito]

This is stupid. The NFHS Rules Committee just wastes its time with hair control devices and uniforms, yet is not willing to implement any rules changes that might actually affect gameplay. It's a pity that they don't have anything at the high school level where experimental rules can be implemented, like the NIT. If there was, they could playtest the restricted area, shot clock, and other proposed rules changes before having the committee vote on them. That way, the committee would actually have an idea of what they are voting on, and why they want to vote for or against, not just MUH NOSTALGIA, or Ain't spending nothing.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

This is stupid. The NFHS Rules Committee just wastes its time with hair control devices and uniforms, yet is not willing to implement any rules changes that might actually affect gameplay. It's a pity that they don't have anything at the high school level where experimental rules can be implemented, like the NIT. If there was, they could playtest the restricted area, shot clock, and other proposed rules changes before having the committee vote on them. That way, the committee would actually have an idea of what they are voting on, and why they want to vote for or against, not just MUH NOSTALGIA, or Ain't spending nothing.

It's not broke, so why fix it?

Shot clocks and restricted areas for HS are gimmicks, nothing more.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by Rich

It's not broke, so why fix it?

Shot clocks and restricted areas for HS are gimmicks, nothing more.

Agree. Worked with a shot clock in RI this year, probably about 45 games’ worth. I think I had three shot clock violations all season. Seriously, it’s the dumbest thing for HS basketball. The kids just want to shoot their threes and drive to the basket.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pantherdreams]

Originally Posted by Rich

It's not broke, so why fix it?

Shot clocks and restricted areas for HS are gimmicks, nothing more.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

Agree to disagree.

Shot clocks, timing rules, time out rules. All determine whether a game played by kids will be more or less - athlete centered or coach/product centered.

I can have a sports car that's not broke, but it might not be the best choice when my life changes and i'm taking 3 kids and dog on family vacations. Nothing wrong with sports cars or mini vans its about your priorities.

I'm not debating whether one is better or worse.

The reality is rules that increase possessions, increase required skill development, decrease coach control all drastically alter the athlete experience with the game and make it more about their experience, their abilities, their decision making. If you think a game played by kids should be more about and driven by them - taking away coach controls and increasing pace of play and number of possessions does that.

If you think having a product about wins/losses and coaches controlling programs, programs controlling leagues and coaches having more control over what all these products/results/players look like is the priority then you are good as is.

Philosophical differences and rules that change the nature of the way game is coached, played and alters both player and coach experience are not gimmicks and shouldn't be dismissed as such.

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

This is stupid. The NFHS Rules Committee just wastes its time with hair control devices and uniforms, yet is not willing to implement any rules changes that might actually affect gameplay. It's a pity that they don't have anything at the high school level where experimental rules can be implemented, like the NIT. If there was, they could playtest the restricted area, shot clock, and other proposed rules changes before having the committee vote on them. That way, the committee would actually have an idea of what they are voting on, and why they want to vote for or against, not just MUH NOSTALGIA, or Ain't spending nothing.

I will concede that FED spends far too much time debating and implementing fashion police stuff rather than sensible changes to gameplay that most people would be on board with.

But I have yet to see a fact-based argument for shot clock/RA in high school other than "the higher levels do it." Sorry, but it's going to take a lot more than that.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by SC Official

I will concede that FED spends far too much time debating and implementing fashion police stuff ...

As long as the direction of the NFHS continues to be toward simplification, modernization, and ease of enforcement (rolled shorts allowed, headbands like those allowed in volleyball, any color for hair control devices) of fashion issues, then I say, "Full speed ahead".

Or, as I screamed to my brother-in-law as he was driving me to the hospital emergency room on an early Sunday morning for one of my kidney stone attacks, "Go through the red lights. Faster. Faster. Faster".

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

(Its like bad trip/ flash back)

Right...

So if player x has their hair in a bun. One or two hair restraint devices around the top knot to keep it secure.

Then takes a roll of pro wrap. Wraps a piece around their head and ties it off then rolls it up into and through their hairline to trap bangs, fly away hair from lower in bun (beacuse layering is thing). Is that a head band they've pushed up into their hair or a hair control device holding some of the hair their other hair control device doesn't that happens to go around their head?

anything that goes around the head is a headband, seems to be a simple thing I have been doing for years. Pre wrap, wrapped around the head is a head band and must meet the color requirements