2019-20 NFHS Rules Changes
 

http://www.nfhs.org/articles/several...edium=NFHS_Org

Five of the seven rules changes in high school basketball concern player equipment, including new uniform provisions that will be required in the 2024-25 season.

All seven rules revisions recommended by the National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS) Basketball Rules Committee at its April 23-25 meeting in Indianapolis were subsequently approved by the NFHS Board of Directors.

Effective with the 2024-25 season, the number on the jersey can no longer be the same color as the jersey itself. Currently, the number can be the same color as the jersey if it is bordered by a contrasting color. Despite the contrasting-color border, the committee said the number is still difficult to see in many cases. The other two options in Rule 3-4-3e regarding the color of the number remain in effect.

A five-year implementation date was approved to allow schools time to budget for purchasing new uniforms.

Four other changes were approved in Rule 3 – Players, Substitutes and Equipment. A new rule, 3-5-8, provides recommendations for use of a mouthguard. Though not required, the committee noted that state associations may deem a tooth and mouth protector required equipment.

A note was added to Rule 3-5-5 to permit folding or rolling the shorts at the natural waistband seam. The new language does state that the shorts have to be in compliance with Rule 3-4-5, which restricts uniform pants/skirts to one visible manufacturer’s logo/trademark/reference.

Theresia Wynns, NFHS director of sports and officials and liaison to the Basketball Rules Committee, said this addition to Rule 3-5-5 modernizes the rule and allows players to adjust the shorts in a manner that serves no harm to the game or its integrity.

The other equipment changes deal with headbands and hair-control devices in Rule 3-5-4. The maximum width of the headband was expanded from 2 inches to 3 inches to be consistent with the rules for volleyball and accommodate athletes who play both sports. In addition, in 3-5-4d, hair-control devices are not required to meet color restrictions. Wynns noted that a hair-control device goes around the hair only, while a headband goes around the entire head.

In another change, assistant coaches now will be able to go onto the court with the head coach in an effort to restore order when a fight breaks out among players.

“It can be difficult for officials to separate players involved in a fight on the court,” Wynns said. “This change will allow assistant coaches to enter the court with the head coach to assist officials in regaining control of the situation and restoring player safety.”

The final change approved by the Basketball Rules Committee is a change in the signal when a held ball occurs. Now, when a held ball occurs, the covering official(s) shall stop the clock using Signal #2 (straight arm, open palm extended) while simultaneously sounding the whistle.

“This change should help to alleviate conflicting calls by officials when a held ball occurs,” Wynns said. “We currently raise one arm to stop the clock for everything except the jump/held ball.”

According to the 2018-19 NFHS High School Athletics Participation Survey, basketball is the third-most popular sport for boys with 551,373 participants in 18,510 schools and the third-most popular sport for girls with 412,407 participants in 18,171 schools.

I like the open hand on the held ball. Something I along with many other officials have already been doing. Get that hand up so everyone can see you have a call, move quickly to the scene of the scrum with better presence, and then you can signal the held ball secondarily once the dust settles. Good change.

On another note, despite the multitude of wild-eyed change ideas in the survey every year, it’s remarkable how static the rules have been in recent years (Rule 3 and signals stuff notwithstanding).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The change allowing assistants to break up a fight is a good one. Now as long as assistants aren't throwing haymakers, we will only have to figure out the penalties for the subs that come off the bench.

Open hand for held ball is fine. Some people are really anal about it one way or another (when I was starting I was implored to not show a hand and have stuck with it), but I really don't think it matters and I can adjust. We use an open hand or closed fist for everything else, no reason not to for held balls. Is NCAA requiring open hand now?

Glad to see rolling the waistband will be explicitly permitted. It was so inconsistently enforced here and the guidance from our state office was unclear, so it will make things easier and give us one less thing to worry about.

The contrasting numbers change is good. I think it's laughable that schools need five years to budget for new uniforms (then again, it's like pulling teeth to get a nominal pay raise for officials), but oh well.

The other fashion police stuff, par for the course. There are many changes that FED could implement to improve the game, but we all know they're slow. Don't even know why they bother sending out that questionnaire.

Numbers ...
 

Never thought this would be a problem until this past season. Had a team with white jerseys and white numbers surrounded by a thin, light gray border. Really stupid looking. I'm not saying that it was super difficult to read the numbers, but I will say that it wasn't super easy.

Hair Control Devices ...
 

Hasn't this been the rule for several years (maybe longer)?

3-5-4-D: Rubber, cloth or elastic bands may be used to control hair. Hard
items, including, but not limited to, beads, barrettes and bobby pins,
are prohibited.

Maybe they're stating something now that wasn't implicitly stated (but assumed) in the past?

Haven't we always said that if it's not illegal, it's legal?

It's a mechanics year. I wonder if there will be any changes other than the stop clock first for held ball (which we'd been doing for quite a while, anyway).

Not sure what the intended difference is I do know that we had an unnecessarily long conversation at one meeting about whether pro wrap was hair control or head band since they were wrapping it around their head to hold their lose hairs in a bun up (25 minutes of my life i'll never get back).

I assume the clarification is that these items for hair control do not need to be in color compliance like head bands????

Let's Waste A Few More Minutes ...
 

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.

I like this change. It will help with double whistles. I've always liked the NBA mechanic of not going directly to 2 thumbs up. I've been trying to make the change myself over the last couple of seasons.

Pretty uneventful year.

I am not in love with the mechanics change about the held ball. It still will cause people to suggest we had something different than a held ball.

I do not care at all about uniform stuff at all. Glad they made some things less important but that is it.

Peace

So now assistant coaches will be all about getting on the floor to break up a fight instead of keeping their bench players on the bench which they were already shitty at doing? Makes sense.

Well we do not have to penalize them now which is better than it used to be.

Peace

Stop The Clock ...
 

Do we stop the clock with an open hand and then follow it up with the old held ball signal, or is the held ball signal completely gone?

If it's gone, how will the table crew know that it's a held ball and be ready to change the arrow? In the past, with the held ball signal, some table crews have occasionally missed it.

It's better than having to count how many assistants came off the bench for each team to figure out who's shooting FT's and ejecting them even though they were trying to restore the peace.

(facepalm)

This is so blah....none of this improves the game or game administration.

Is this a serious question?

You know what Signal #2 is, don't you?

Peace

I Am Serious, And Don’t Call Me Shirley …
 

Yes it was. The press release is slightly unclear as to whether the held ball signal has been replaced, or whether an additional signal (the straight arm, open palm stop the clock signal) has been added to the held ball signal sequence.

I hope (and now believe) it's the later, not the former. Just like the other signals we give after giving the stop the clock signal (travel, three seconds, etc.)

... a change in the signal when a held ball occurs. Now, when a held ball occurs, the covering official(s) shall stop the clock using Signal #2 (straight arm, open palm extended) while simultaneously sounding the whistle. “This change should help to alleviate conflicting calls by officials when a held ball occurs,” Wynns said. “We currently raise one arm to stop the clock for everything except the jump/held ball.”

So you are telling us that you have all this inside information that you claim to access to and this is confusing you?

Peace

Stop The Clock ...
 

I have never claimed to have any inside information about NFHS mechanics and signals. Here in Connecticut, we use IAABO mechanics and signals.

https://forum.officiating.com/basket...ml#post1032617

As I quickly perused the press release for the first time, I carelessly and incorrectly interpreted the word "change" to mean replace, as in "presto chango". After further consideration, I decided that "change" actually meant an addition to the held ball signal, like many other signal sequences that begin with a stop the clock signal.

Also, no more inside information for me. My local interpreter, who had also served as a Connecticut state interpreter, and who had held high level training positions on IAABO International, including having access to NFHS rule change procedures, and committees, recently retired.

https://forum.officiating.com/basket...ml#post1032618

Whenever my neighbor, Frank, gets a home project done, he always gets it done inexpensively because he always "knows a guy".

In regard to my access to inside information, I no longer "know a guy".

Deja Vu All over again.
 

(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?

Was Carly Simon Singing About Him ???
 

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).

https://tse2.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.x...=0&w=300&h=300

Billy, please set yourself some posting limit per day.

When In Rome ...
 

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.

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

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

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.

Damn The Torpedoes ...
 

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".

Minnesota used the restricted arc this year. A safety rule per the MSHSL. It is sometimes difficult to administer with two officials but for the most part it wasn't a terrible change. We certainly had way less of the secondary defenders sliding in for a cheap charge call.

Why is that cheap? If a player can establish LGP, then maybe the offensive player should not be taking it to tbe rack.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

You can make things “safer” by accurately calling charges so ball handlers stop barreling over defenders. All without the RA.

I don’t understand why people want to penalize legal defense. Amazingly in my games when we call charges, ball handlers start pulling up.

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.

This is a game played by kids that will never play another game beyond this level. We can add all the things it is not going to automatically make the game better. It is clear at this time the NF is not that interested in those kinds of rules if they keep being presented and even used as experiments and nothing like those rules have been added. I have seen many states take on rules and eventually it comes to the NF committee and they take them on as they did in football this year. I think the people that often want these rules tend to lack perspective as to what high school sports actually is. I have said before I would be fine if these rules came into place, but it does not mean there would not be issues. We are still arguing in areas for 2 or 3 person and we want rules that the other levels only use 3 officials. Just not very well thought out if you ask me to assume these changes would make the game better.

Peace

I am with you Bill. Furthermore, I am confused how coming out with the Held Ball is will "alleviate conflicting calls by officials when a held ball occurs" according to Theresa Wynns. How is this any different than when one Official comes out with the Foul Stop Clock Signal while another Officials comes out with the Non-Foul Stop Clock Signal.

MTD, Sr.

It's a lot less visible. We've been doing this for a few years. It works well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

The NFHS does allow some limited experimentation. In my pre-officiating days, our state was allowed to experiment with the running clock point-differential rule before the option was adopted nationwide.

More recently, our state experimented with a limited number of games played in halves.

It was not advocated here and really do not see the benefit of that position. If I am blowing my whistle and I know I have a held ball, that looks better than the signal they suggest IMO. It looks like you are about to call something else and then call a held ball to not cause another issue. That is why I am not a fan of this and probably will not change personally. I saw officials the last few weeks do this when I was at camp and many times it looked like they could have called something else. Oh well, to each its own I guess.

Peace

That is what I want, a game that is more player-centered than coach-centered. As an official, it is easier for me in a player-centered game, because I can focus more on playcalling than on having to talk to the coaches and policing their behavior. In my experience, coaches tend to misbehave more than players do, so minimizing interactions between coaches and officials is better for my sanity as well. This is the reason why college basketball, even though its rules committee is dominated by coaches, has the rules and mechanics it does (shot clock, only players call live-ball timeouts, officials go opposite the table after reporting fouls, to avoid confrontations with coaches).

This is why I prefer rules that give players more control over the game, as opposed to coaches. Having to divide my attention between action on the court and benches affects my ability to properly call the plays in front of me, especially when i have to verify that it is the HEAD coach calling the timeout, that there is player control, etc. In the time that takes, there might have been a foul, a score, a violation, or something else, and then for me to take that away and call the timeout leaves me looking like a doofus. If only players can call live-ball timeouts, my job is easier, because I can see which player called the timeout, and verify that he has control of the ball while officiating him and the on-ball defender. A shot clock is also better, because it is an objective instrument to measure possessions, rather than the 5-second count, which is arbitrary, and depends on an official's interpretation of 6 feet, a team's defensive strategy, the official's mood, etc. It also gives more control to the players, because it requires them to stay engaged and try to play offense and defense for the entire game. As an official, the shot clock makes my job easier, because it keeps me aware of the time in the game, it gives me a read on the 10-second count (whether a visible proxy to the 10-second count (possession was obtained at 29, so violation will be at 19), or the official 10-second count), and it may allow me to not worry as much about closely guarded counts, depending on the rule set. If I don't have to worry about a visible 10-second count, I can get a wider angle for officiating transition, and pick up more plays than just the ball handler as Trail, assist with the 10-second count while picking up additional plays as the Center official, or be more situation-aware as the Lead while moving to position with the 1st wave of players. Finally, I like the shot clock, because it reduces the occurrence of the stall-and-foul strategy at the end of games (aggressive fouling on defense only happens in shot clock games near the time when the shot clock turns off, and if the defensive team needs more possessions than the number of possessions that remain). This reduction in the stall-and-foul strategy does not force me to alter my judgement on contact in the final minutes by calling fouls that would be marginal at best at other times of the game, and does not require me to make as many snap decisions between common or intentional fouls that many officials refuse to make in accordance with the rules, despite repeated points of emphasis from the NFHS about calling intentional fouls in the final minutes of games. The shot clock also rewards players for proper offensive and defensive play, rebounding, and punishes then for fouls, so it is a good way for players to learn how to play basketball better from natural, in-game consequences. The restricted area is a safety rule (by requiring players who take charges to be outside the basket, it affords offensive players more of an opportunity to stop before contact, reducing injuries to offensive and defensive players from crashing in close proximity to the basket), and as such, it can benefit the game.

I can tell you do not work college basketball because college coaches control everything at that level. As a matter of fact, based on what you said, college basketball is not for you either. Only the NBA and that takes a tremendous amount of being more than a play-caller to become one of those in today's era. You either have to have the look and the demeanor or you will not be there at all.

Also if you think the more you worry about play-calling is what will help you, then you are in for a rude awakening when you or if you ever get to those levels. Play-calling is a small part of that battle. You better learn how to deal with people and situations more so than calling a block-charge. I am not talking about what happens at the Division 1 level either. NAIA has a lot of challenges that you will never see at the high school level for example from coaches and even players. Actually, players do not say as much at the college level because they are heavily in the control of the coaches. If they act up the coach will not play them or remove them from the team. The coaches essentially pick them or give them an opportunity and the players are well aware of that in most cases.

I just came back from 3 weeks of camping for college-level evaluators. I can tell you that they talked very little overall about play calling. Clinicians talked about our demeanor, our teamwork, who actually made the call, how we handled a coach. They even talked about our fitness and positioning, even when the ball was not live. They did not spend a lot of time on play calling or if we got that block-charge right. They talked about whistle cadence and why did you even have a call at all on that play? Those are not the issues you stated that you want to worry about. You always make it sound like there are no issues what so ever at the other levels about how they handle rules or things that you call arbitrary like 5 seconds (which still applies at the NCAA level) or post play which has rules about where and when you can make contact with your armbar and how much pressure is being put on the ball handler. All additional things you have to think about when officiating that level of game. You act like these are something that never come into play but for a few rules differences.

Peace

I find it amusing that there are those who say they are "athlete-centered" or "player-centered" - this is a game played by teenagers as part of the educational experience.

I have yet to hear anyone ever say that they wish math class was more learner-centered.

When you read between the lines, most people who want a shot clock do so because it eliminates those contests where a smart coach figures out how to suck the air out of a game in order to compete with a more talented team. And what, exactly, is wrong with that? It's a great life lesson when kids realize that having the most physical talent isn't the only thing that goes into making a great team.

Frankly, it takes a lot more feel for the game to officiate it as it is now. What some on this thread seem to advocate for is to reduce or eliminate the amount of judgment we have to make -- to take some of the art out of officiating in favor of more science.

And my first reaction to that is that maybe some of those officials just aren't that good at the art of calling a game and want to make it easier on themselves.

Tennis Anyone ???
 

Yes, coaches can be distracting, especially if you let them. No matter what level, no matter what rule set, if there's a coach involved, an official will have to deal with the coach.

Don't want to deal with a coach? Officiate tennis. Sit in the high chair at Wimbledon.

And what's wrong with coaches coaching kids? They're high school kids, not young adults. They need adult guidance. They need adult direction. They need adult supervision. That's how they learn. In algebra class. In physics class. In woodworking class. In drivers education. In marching band. And on the basketball court, or the football field, or the softball diamond. It's high school, kids are there to learn. It's not a low level, minor league, miniature, junior version of the NBA, or the WNBA.

Yes, there was a certain charm about playing playground basketball, baseball, football, and hockey back when I was a kid. No adults involved. No coaches. No officials. We "scheduled" the games, set up the fields, made our own teams, made our own rules, enforced those rules, learned how to play the sport, got hurt, had some fights, but eventually learned how to settle disagreements, and learned how cooperate with each other, and have fun.

Yes, there were valuable life lessons learned, but is this what we want our high school sports to look like?

Just toss the ball out onto the floor and say, "Have at it", like our substitute physical education teachers said in high school.

https://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.x...=0&w=300&h=300

When I read this change, I chuckled - a few years ago on this very forum, I was told I had bigger issues that I couldn’t see a number.

https://forum.officiating.com/basket...y-numbers.html

I guess my political pull in Indy got this approved. Thanks to all
the naysayers!!😂😂

It's The Black Helicopters ...
 

I've always known that the Forum is being fully monitored, all the time, by the NFHS and the Russians.

Illegal, Too Big ...
 

https://www.lucidchart.com/publicSeg...d0b0/image.png

Would you bet the farm that the player's number is not a twenty-one with a fold over the one?

Not just a few bucks, the whole farm, including the back forty, and the family cemetery behind the chicken coop.

Seems to be a very minor issue, mostly in girls games. I guess many girls like a "bloused" jersey, one size too big?

I make this mistake once or twice every year, always in girls games (where I also occasionally get a long ponytail hiding a back of jersey number).

Yeah, that's what we really need, NFHS rules that say that players must wear proper sized uniforms.

And no more long ponytails.

Yeah, that's exactly what we need.

https://tse3.explicit.bing.net/th?id...=0&w=215&h=162

If it were a 21, it wouldn't be because of the colors that you couldn't see it.

This is a wholly unnecessary change. As long as the colors are actually contrasting and the borders sufficiently sized, anyone short of Ray Charles should be able to see them.

To Be Clear ...
 

Agree, just bringing up another minor problem, one that I do not want the NFHS to fix.

Note: Ray Charles is dead, how about Little Stevie Wonder?

Say, how about a little Little Stevie Wonder?

https://youtu.be/9Vjj6J7gXpY

Weird. Helping teachers figure out how to do that in all subject areas is basically my job now. Its also been the major theme of every professional learning opportunity our school district has been offering for years, and there are academic research on how to do it effectively dating back 30 years.

Student cemtered was the wrong phrase. Minimizing the role of the teacher would've been better. I'm an educator, BTW.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Student centred learning changes the role of educator in the room and learning process. Not about the specific lesson or classroom the teacher wants, but rather the content and questions the students care about with the teacher building in the structure and supports to have them meet outcomes.

When people say player centred I assume they mean the same thing. Decision making, game play, practice style, being more about player goals, choices, control and experience. The role of coach changesnot diminished or minimized.

Exactly! The shot clock is more conducive to making game play more about player choices, control, and experience, because more players get actual game time playing offense and defense with a shot clock than without one. Players would also enjoy the game more if they get to play basketball for the entire game, rather than being forced to resort to a strange mashup of Whac-a-Mole and keepaway at the end.

From a coach's perspective, it would be easier to encourage your players during a timeout to say "Give me 30 more seconds, and we have a chance to play offense" than to play the cat-and-mouse game that is almost required to obtain possession in the final 3-4 minutes of a game without a shot clock.

From an official's perspective, I wouldn't have to make as many key decisions that could affect the game in the last few minutes (common foul vs intentional foul on fouls to stop the clock). I personally do not agree with the mindset of "don't make any decisions that can affect the game", but I can understand some officials' reluctance to rule intentional fouls in end-of-game situations. During the rest of the game, I would also have an easier time making 10-second calls, because I can use the shot clock, either officially or unofficially, as a point of reference. If a coach says "You counted too fast", I say "Shot clock said 30 when you got the ball. It's at 19 now. 10 seconds are up." The shot clock has also allowed certain areas to eliminate the closely-guarded count on a dribbler (DC has no closely guarded count on a dribbler, same as NCAA and FIBA), which can be an arbitrary call, because different officials have different interpretations of 6 feet.

When a team has possession is unambiguous (a player holding or dribbling the ball inbounds), so deciding when to start the shot clock is easier than deciding to start a 10-second count, just like the 40-second play clock in football is easier to administer (start play clock when previous play ends) than the 25-second play clock (have ball on ground, and wait for the Referee to blow his whistle). If I do happen to have a bad operator, I can just switch the timer and shot clock operator, or get someone who actually pays attention if needed.

Why Diminish The Role Of Adult Coaches …
 

What's wrong with adult coaches coaching high school kids? It's high school, where kids go to learn. The school is loaded with adult teachers teaching kids, including teachers teaching basketball. Student choices? Does the kid sitting in trigonometry class decide if he wants to learn about, and practice using, sines, and cosines, or does the adult teacher guide the juvenile student, teaching him, giving him various opportunities to practice, testing him for success, and going over it again if there's little success?

Why diminish the role, or drastically change the role, of adult coaches in high school sports? To what end?

Kids learn how to play a sport as integral part of their total high school educational experience. Their friends and parents enjoy watching them play. A very small group of kids play well enough to play in college, some even earn a full or partial college scholarship. An even smaller group of talented athletes may make a profession out of a sport, if not playing, then coaching, scouting, advertising, media, sportscasting, licensing, writing, administrator, marketing, sales, equipment, clothing, etc. Those that don't play beyond high school at least know enough about the sport to become educated, well informed, life long fans, some may even become officials.

Except for a few small blemishes, what's wrong with high school sports as they exist today?

You know what they say about things that ain't broke.

And all of that means absolutely nothing. Who cares what the learning is centered? Sorry, but that has nothing to do with what rule is used or not used in a game that is played at the high school level. Just worked a few weeks of travel/AAU games with a shot clock and coaches still ran the damn games the way they saw fit. It changed nothing but made them shoot sooner in an possession which half the time you did not notice anyway. This entire idea that somehow the game is so much better is silly. I can be that there are many around the country that do not see some of the ball that I see and there is no need for a shot clock in those games now. And that has nothing to do with other college rules like the RA or when bonus resets. These are just things that people assume are going to help the game in their minds. That is why the NCAA is not taking on many rules people think they would because the Men's side actually makes money, not lose it so these changes affect other elements of the marketing of the game. And having used the shot clock this weekend with a lot of high school only officials, it was not done smoothly either. At least when you add elements of shot clock resets or what stops the clock like a foul in the backcourt verse the frontcourt.

Peace

Police Blotter ...
 

It's often been said, it's better to see a kid's name published in the sports section of the local newspaper than in the police blotter.

https://tse2.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.j...=0&w=194&h=167

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

So Easy ...
 

So easy a NFHS director of sports and officials and liaison to the Basketball Rules Committee can do it.

https://tse1.explicit.bing.net/th?id...=0&w=353&h=185

Nothing. Nothing at all.

Nothing wrong with coaches coaching and teachers teaching. The idea behind rule changes, like policy changes or changes pedagogical practices in regards to impact on game coaching/teaching is a) to not allow practitioners or practices to become outdated b) to best serve the students and make learning more appropriate and authentic. c)prioritize student experience

Changing role of coach/teacher does not inherently diminish it. Simply changes where effort and energy is put. If technology can deliver content than teachers can spend more time and energy working with individuals, remediating and enriching. If coaches don't have to spend time controlling/limiting possessions then they can spend that time and energy on making their players better at performing in the possessions they have. Time on players/technique teaching vs time on tactic design and execution.

1+1=2
Imagine going to school to visit your son’s math teacher. The teacher informs you that your son does a very good job with addition, but does not handle subtraction very well. As a result the teacher has decided that your son will not do any more subtraction for the rest of the year. He will just focus on the things he does well. His poor scores on subtraction are hurting the class average. The teacher also informs you that since he will not be doing subtraction it will make no sense to introduce multiplication and division. So you need to resign yourself to the fact that your son will only be able to do addition.

How would you respond as a parent? What would you think about this teacher’s ability to teach math?

Take the same situation to the basketball court. The coach informs you that your son is not going to be allowed to shoot the ball. His poor shooting percentage is hurting the team’s average. He will only be allowed to play defence. The coach will not be introducing any advanced skills with the ball because your son will always be a role player. The team is going to run plays that highlight only those players who can shoot.

Asking a coach to develop players to make decisions and play makers vs teaching kids to run plays and hold the ball is different not diminishing. Some would argue it increases the coaches role value because they have to be able to develop kids not just move kids who can play around. Teaching kids to play and make decisions and then letting them play at game time. Don't see a lot of teachers calling timeout in the middle of the test and scripting the next 3 question answers for everyone or saying everyone just copy Jimmy's answers we'll get better test scores.

Coaching Philosophy ...
 

I coached middle school basketball for over twenty-five years. I always worked on shooting at practice, every day, for everyone on the team, good shooters, and bad shooters. And short players (and tall players) always worked on rebounding skills, and tall players (and short players) always worked on ball handling skills, every day. Weak hand dribbling and weak hand shooting, every day, for everybody. Offensive oriented players (and defensive oriented players) were taught and practiced how to become better defensive players, while defensive oriented players (and offensive oriented players) were taught and practiced how to become better offensive players. Everybody learned how to set, and more importantly, how to use screens.

Unlike a few other sports, basketball is a sport where players have to be able to play both offense and defense at the same time.

Everybody on the team was taught all aspects of our offensive and defensive sets. Our center was expected to be able to play the point guard position, and our point guard was expected to be able to play the center position.

Ten players were guaranteed to play in every game, some for just a few minutes, and some for a lot of minutes. Nobody played thirty-two. Some of the younger players on the end of the bench knew that they may have to sit out the game unless we got way ahead near the end.

My play book was small, with only a few set plays, seldom designed for a single player. We lost some games because of that, and that's on me, but we won a lot of games because my players were often more skilled in a helter skelter middle school style game, especially toward the end of the season.

During games, we ran some plays to win games with the players that we had on the roster, and on the court at the time, winning (and losing) with our players doing what they did best, some shooters, some rebounders, some defenders, some passers, some dribblers, some screeners, etc.

During my senior year of high school, I don't think that I took a single field goal attempt from more than ten feet away, and seldom dribbled more than three or four times in succession. That wasn't the best way for the coach to utilize my talents to help the team win games. My job was to get rebounds, set good screens, and play good defense, that's what I did best, yet I still averaged about fifteen points a game. I would have loved to score more points, but that wouldn't have given my team a better chance to win games. I was never told what not to do, I was just told what to do (but I kind of knew that if I took a twenty footer, or tried to dribble through a trap, that I'd be sitting on the bench next to the coach).

As a freshman, I was the worst player on the freshman team roster, and only got into games when we were way ahead, or way behind. As a sophomore and junior I split time with varsity players who had similar skills as mine. As a senior I played as long as I could stay out of foul trouble (I was sometimes a little too aggressive). Of course I wanted to play more my first three years, but that wouldn't have given the team its best chance to win.

I know that there are other good coaching philosophies (one opposing coach in my league always played his five best players for the entire game unless they got into foul trouble, and he ran several set plays for his star players, he was usually successful against me), but what's wrong with the coaching philosophy I played under and coached with (double digit wins almost every year, players ready for high school basketball after playing in my program)?

https://tse2.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP._...=0&w=409&h=189

Serious question. What is with just the memo? No POE or commentary on the rules beyond what we got? Is the NF changing the way they were doing things or is this just and oversight?

Peace

Naw, they're just late. The typical order NFHS releases of new stuff is:
1. News release describing generally the new rules.
2. Release of the exact wording of the new rules.
3. Comments on the Rules.
4. POE's.
5. Rules book in Ebook format.
6. Printed Rules book.
7. Casebook in Ebook format.
8. Printed Casebook.
Keep an eye on this site for the online publication of each of these steps, whatever order they choose to issue their releases: Basketball
They don't always follow the same order, nor are they as timely each and every year.

Next step in the traditional NFHS process is today's release the text of the new rules for 2019-20. Here's what has been posted at http://www.nfhs.org/sports-resource-...anges-2019-20/:


THE TEXT OF THIS FIRST CITATION IS "STRUCK THROUGH", INDICATING THAT IT NO LONGER APPLIES ON THE DATE SHOWN... (strike through text doesn't copy and paste to the Forum):
3-4-3e (2): The team jersey color itself when bordered with not more than two ¼ inch solid border(s) contrasting with the team jersey color. (Effective 2023-24)

Rationale: The number being the same color as the jersey, though bordered by a contrasting color, is difficult to see. Two options for number design remain.


3-5-4b: A headband is any item that goes around the entire head. It must be a circular design without extensions. If worn, only one headband is permitted, it must be worn on the forehead/crown. It must be nonabrasive and unadorned, and it must be no more than 3 inches wide.

Rationale: I am suggesting that we make the Basketball and Volleyball rule codes on headbands, the same. Girls are wearing headbands that are wider than 2 inches in basketball but are allowed to wear up to 3-inch headbands in volleyball. I think it would help girls who are in these two sports to comply with the rule without confusion.


3-5-4d: Add to (d) - Hair control devices are not required to meet color restrictions.

Rationale: To address inconsistent interpretations regarding items such as pre-wrap controlling hair.


3-5-5: Add Note: NOTE: Provided the shorts are not in conflict with 3-4-5, no drawstring or other part of the shorts intended to maintain them in a normal position causes potential harm to the player or others and wearing of the shorts is not objectionable in exposing the anatomy, there is no restriction on folding or rolling the shorts at the natural waistband seam.

Rationale: Rolling of the shorts is only illegal by interpretation, not by current rule. This is an attempt to modernize the rule and allow what players seem to want and what serves as no harm to the game or its integrity. In particular, this interpretation was made because allegedly manufacturers did not intend on the shorts to be rolled when in fact many manufacturer reps will tell you that the seams are intentionally made to offer options in the way they are worn.


3-5-8 NEW: MOUTHGUARD

1. A tooth and mouth protector (intraoral), if worn shall:

a. include an occlusal (protecting and separating the biting surfaces) portion;

b. include a labial (protecting the teeth and supporting structures) portion;

c. cover the posterior teeth with adequate thickness;

2. It is recommended that the protector be properly fitted, protecting the anterior (leading) dental arch and:

a. constructed from a model made from an impression of the individual’s teeth, or

b. constructed and fitted to the individual by impressing the teeth into the tooth and mouth protector itself.

3. State associations may deem a tooth and mouth protector required equipment.


Change section 6 to 7; change section 7 to 8.

Rationale: Provides another safety option with specific with coverage for the devise.


9-9-1: Exception:

A ball in team control of Team A 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 unless the offense was the last to touch the ball before it went into the backcourt. If the offense was last to touch the ball in its frontcourt, only the defense can legally recover the basketball.

Rationale: This was the original intent of the proposal from 2017-18 and 2018-19. Despite the committee's best efforts, the wording adopted, which mirrored the intent, has caused issues. This wording is identical to the exception at other levels of play and easier to teach and understand.


10-5-5 Note: The head coach and any number of assistant coaches may enter the court in the situation where a fight may break out - or has broken out - to prevent the situation from escalating.

Rationale: Based on some fight situations that I have seen and heard about over the last couple years at the high school level, I believe that this change, which was instituted at the NCAA level, is a change that is good for the game of basketball and in regard to player safety. It is difficult in our society for officials to be able to help to separate players involved in a fight since our society has become very litigious. Changing the rule to allow the head coach and assistant coaches to assist in these types of situations will help the officials to regain control of the entire situation more quickly and especially in regard to player safety.


Stop Clock for Jump/Held Ball-Part 3 of the NFHS Basketball Officials Manual-#3: When a held ball occurs, covering official(s) shall stop the clock using signal #2 (straight arm, open palm extended) while simultaneously sounding their whistle. Then both arms are extended straight out, at chest level, with fist clinched. Thumbs are displayed as a part of the signal. Signal is given with both arms moving in an upward motion. Should be followed with a directional signal (See #6) indicating team possession.

*Occurs when opponents both have their hands on the ball and neither can gain control

*When an opponent places their hand on the ball and prevents an airborne shooter from passing or releasing the try.

Rationale: This change should help in the alleviation of conflicting calls by officials when a held ball occurs, ie jump ball and foul both called on the same play. We currently raise one arm to stop the clock for everything except the jump/held ball.

Is it correct that the newly released "9-9-1 Exception" effectively parallels the NCAA-M's ruling on the backcourt issue? Or aren't we "there" yet?

Nope, still last touch, first touch. They just changed some wording but they did not change the rule. In NCAA rules it does not matter who touches the ball in the FC as long as the defense deflected the ball.

At least that is far as I could tell at this point.

Peace

Ugh. Rut seems to be right. In spite of NFHS' vaunted claims in its "rationale", they haven't achieved what they say they aimed for.

The NCAA-M text reads:
Backcourt: (Rule 9-12.5) Permits either team to be the first to touch the ball in the backcourt when a pass or any loose ball in the front court is deflected by the defense which causes the ball to go into the backcourt even if the offense was the last to touch the ball in the front court.

NFHS "rationale":
Rationale: This was the original intent of the proposal from 2017-18 and 2018-19. Despite the committee's best efforts, the wording adopted, which mirrored the intent, has caused issues. This wording is identical to the exception at other levels of play and easier to teach and understand.

It isn't identical.

I think this would have been a major rules change if it was the NCAA Rule. Unfortunately, we might have to wait for this change.

Peace

The only thing the new backcourt rule did was eliminate that ridiculous interpretation that they doubled down on a few years ago that almost every official thought was bogus. But it would be too difficult for them to just "retract" that interpretation. Instead they had to revise the rule and fumble with the wording to confuse everyone even more.

Basketball Points of Emphasis - 2019-20
 

Basketball Points of Emphasis - 2019-20

1. Head Band and Hair Control Devices: These items are often thought to be interchangeable. They are not. Each item has different guidelines to be followed as outlined in the rules book. Coaches and players need to be aware of the differences between the two items, so players are not found in violation of the rules.
A headband is defined as any item that goes around the entire head, it must be circular in design without extensions. The headband must unadorned, nonabrasive and be no wider than 3 inches. Headbands have color restrictions. 3-5-4a, b
A hair control device is defined as an item that goes around the hair such as rubber, cloth, or elastic bands. Hair control devices have no color restrictions. 3-5-4dSMAC

2. Medical Bracelet: It is the coach's role to know what the rules allowances and restrictions are, and insure the players are properly informed. The head coach, by rules, must not permit a team member to participate while wearing an illegal uniform, illegal equipment, illegal apparel, etc. It is, therefore, incumbent on the coach to be sure the rules and restrictions have been reviewed by the team, including, and especially, allowable accessories.
Yes, it is also the officials' role to monitor the players, the uniforms and accessories. However, the head coach must be very much involved. The officials should not be placed in a position where they are often viewed as "being picky/searching for" illegal uniform and apparel items.
By rule, the medical alert medal or bracelet must be taped to the person securely while the medical information is visible. Regardless of the type of material the medical alert bracelet is of, it must be taped to the arm securely with the medical information visible. 3-5-7

3. Throw-in Violations: The throw-in and the throw-in count begin when the ball is at the disposal of a player of the team entitled to it.
The throw-in ends when:
a. The passed ball touches or is touched by another player in-bounds.
b. The passed ball touches or is touched by another player out-of-bounds. except as in 7-5-7.
c. The throw-in team commits a violation.
The designated throw-in spot is 3 feet wide with no depth limitation and is established and signaled by the official prior to putting the ball at the thrower's disposal. Pivot foot restrictions are not in affect for a designated throw-in. The thrower must keep one foot on or over the designated spot until the ball is released.
Violation - To leave the designated throw-in spot prior to releasing the ball
Violation - To not pass the ball directly into the court so it touches or is touched by another player (in-bounds or out-of-bounds) on the court before going out of bounds untouched.
Violation - To pass the ball so it goes directly out of bounds prior to touching another player.
Violation - To not release the ball on a pass directly into the court before five seconds have elapsed.
After ruling and signaling a violation, team-control foul, player-control foul held ball or time-out, it is vital that the ruling official, at the site of the ruling, indicate the designated throw-in spot (see Manual page 65, diagram 5-6).

4. Pre-Game Meeting with Administrator on Supervision and Crowd Control: It is a necessity to have game an administration representative to meet with the official crew. This meeting will allow for communicating the expectations of each group. The contest officials are there to manage the contest which includes the players and coaches. It is the expectation that school administration will manage the student body, parents and all other spectators.
Game administration is responsible to be proactive in crowd supervision and control. Administration should address inappropriate spectator behavior before it escalates.
Spectator behavior remains a critical concern. Too often, spectators are using abusive language toward coaches, players and officials. Spectators are also approaching the court, team areas and locker rooms - places that used to be "off limits" - to confront participants.
Game administrators must create and follow security procedures and support efforts to have offending spectators removed from the premises. Proactive policies lead to fewer problems. It is the game administrator's ultimate responsibility to provide a safe environment for coaches, players and officials. Do not wait for the official to point out the problem.

Links ...
 

NFHS Rules Changes - 2019-20

http://www.nfhs.org/sports-resource-...anges-2019-20/

Basketball Comments On The Rules - 2019-20

http://www.nfhs.org/sports-resource-...rules-2019-20/

Basketball Points Of Emphasis - 2019-20

http://www.nfhs.org/sports-resource-...hasis-2019-20/

NFHS Rules Changes - 2019-20
 

Cleaned up for clarity.

NFHS Rules Changes - 2019-20

3-4-3e (2): (Effective 2023-24)
Rationale: The number being the same color as the jersey, though bordered by a contrasting color, is difficult to see. Two options for number design remain.

3-5-4b: A headband is any item that goes around the entire head. It must be a circular design without extensions. If worn, only one headband is permitted, it must be worn on the forehead/crown. It must be nonabrasive and unadorned, and it must be no more than 3 inches wide.
Rationale: I am suggesting that we make the Basketball and Volleyball rule codes on headbands, the same. Girls are wearing headbands that are wider than 2 inches in basketball but are allowed to wear up to 3-inch headbands in volleyball. I think it would help girls who are in these two sports to comply with the rule without confusion.

3-5-4d: Add to (d) - Hair control devices are not required to meet color restrictions.
Rationale: To address inconsistent interpretations regarding items such as pre-wrap controlling hair.

3-5-5: Add Note: NOTE: Provided the shorts are not in conflict with 3-4-5, no drawstring or other part of the shorts intended to maintain them in a normal position causes potential harm to the player or others and wearing of the shorts is not objectionable in exposing the anatomy, there is no restriction on folding or rolling the shorts at the natural waistband seam.
Rationale: Rolling of the shorts is only illegal by interpretation, not by current rule. This is an attempt to modernize the rule and allow what players seem to want and what serves as no harm to the game or its integrity. In particular, this interpretation was made because allegedly manufacturers did not intend on the shorts to be rolled when in fact many manufacturer reps will tell you that the seams are intentionally made to offer options in the way they are worn.

3-5-8 NEW: MOUTHGUARD
1. A tooth and mouth protector (intraoral), if worn shall:
a. include an occlusal (protecting and separating the biting surfaces) portion;
b. include a labial (protecting the teeth and supporting structures) portion;
c. cover the posterior teeth with adequate thickness;
2. It is recommended that the protector be properly fitted, protecting the anterior (leading) dental arch and:
a. constructed from a model made from an impression of the individual’s teeth, or
b. constructed and fitted to the individual by impressing the teeth into the tooth and mouth protector itself.
3. State associations may deem a tooth and mouth protector required equipment.
Change section 6 to 7; change section 7 to 8.
Rationale: Provides another safety option with specific with coverage for the devise.

9-9-1: Exception:
A ball in team control of Team A 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 unless the offense was the last to touch the ball before it went into the backcourt. If the offense was last to touch the ball in its frontcourt, only the defense can legally recover the basketball.
Rationale: This was the original intent of the proposal from 2017-18 and 2018-19. Despite the committee's best efforts, the wording adopted, which mirrored the intent, has caused issues. This wording is identical to the exception at other levels of play and easier to teach and understand.

10-5-5 Note: The head coach and any number of assistant coaches may enter the court in the situation where a fight may break out - or has broken out - to prevent the situation from escalating.
Rationale: Based on some fight situations that I have seen and heard about over the last couple years at the high school level, I believe that this change, which was instituted at the NCAA level, is a change that is good for the game of basketball and in regard to player safety. It is difficult in our society for officials to be able to help to separate players involved in a fight since our society has become very litigious. Changing the rule to allow the head coach and assistant coaches to assist in these types of situations will help the officials to regain control of the entire situation more quickly and especially in regard to player safety.

Stop Clock for Jump/Held Ball-Part 3 of the NFHS Basketball Officials Manual-#3: When a held ball occurs, covering official(s) shall stop the clock using signal #2 (straight arm, open palm extended) while simultaneously sounding their whistle. Then both arms are extended straight out, at chest level, with fist clinched. Thumbs are displayed as a part of the signal. Signal is given with both arms moving in an upward motion. Should be followed with a directional signal (See #6) indicating team possession.
*Occurs when opponents both have their hands on the ball and neither can gain control
*When an opponent places their hand on the ball and prevents an airborne shooter from passing or releasing the try.
Rationale: This change should help in the alleviation of conflicting calls by officials when a held ball occurs, ie jump ball and foul both called on the same play. We currently raise one arm to stop the clock for everything except the jump/held ball.

Basketball Comments On The Rules - 2019-20 ...
 

Basketball Comments On The Rules - 2019-20

Contrasting Number (3-4-3e,2): (Effective 2024-25)
The color of the number cannot be the same color as the body of the jersey, though bordered by a contrasting color, because it is difficult to see. Two other options for the style of the number remain as indicated in the rules book.

Headband Clarification (3-5-4b): Headbands may be no more than 3 inches wide. This rule change is consistent with the width of the headband allowed in volleyball. A headband is worn around the head or the crown of the head. The headband must be circular without extensions. The headband is subject to color restrictions

Hair Control Devices (3-5-4d): Hair control devices are not subject to color restrictions. A hair control device is worn around the hair.

Team Member’s Equipment (3-5-5): Added Note: This note provides states an opportunity to ease the rule on wearing the shorts as intended as long as there is not a conflict with Rule 3-4-5, the drawstring or other parts do not cause harm to the wearer or others and the shorts are worn in a manner that parts of the anatomy are not objectionably exposed. Rolling or folding the shorts at the natural waistband may be allowed.

Mouth Protector (NEW 3-5-6): This rule provides a safety option for players with specifics for coverage of the device. State association may deem a tooth and mouth protector mandatory.

Backcourt (9-9-1): The rewording of this Exception is provided to give more clarity to the exception already in the book. The Exception defines who is able to recover the ball when it goes from the front court to the backcourt based on who last touched the ball in the front court.

Bench Technical (10-5-5 Note): This addition to the rule permits assistant coaches to enter the court to assist in controlling a fight that has broken out or is about to break out. This change does not preclude the responsibility for bench control. The head coach must preplan what assistant coaches must do in such a situation. An assistant coach must be designated to remain at the bench to maintain control of bench personnel.

Signal Chart – change in execution of signal #3: The held ball signal must be executed by first stopping the clock for a violation with signal #2 prior to the use of the held ball signal

Confirmation Needed ...
 

9-2-2: The ball shall be passed by the thrower directly into the court
from out-of-bounds so it touches or is touched by another player (inbounds
or out of bounds) on the court before going out of bounds untouched.

Just want to confirm something.

A1 inbounds the ball from the endline on a designated spot throwin. The ball passed by thrower A1 first touches player A2 who catches the throwin pass while standing on the out of bounds side of the sideline boundary near the division line.

After the violation, where is the subsequent designated spot throwin for Team B?

At the original spot of the throw-in; in this case, on the endline.

Throwin Violation ...
 

Thanks ilyazhito.

So this situation is a throwin violation, not an out of bounds violation.

Does everyone concur with ilyazhito?

9-2-2: The ball shall be passed by the thrower directly into the court
from out-of-bounds so it touches or is touched by another player (inbounds
or out of bounds) on the court before going out of bounds untouched.

I disagree. Unless there is a case play or interpretation that says otherwise, then I think this is still an out of bounds violation. The only person that caused the ball to be out of bounds was the person receiving the pass. But I am willing to change my mind if you find something to contradict my position that is from an official source. The thrower did not "cause" this violation IMO.

Peace

FIFY.

He's wrong. At least in FED and NCAA

Additionals...
 

OK, all or most of these "changes" are really quite perfunctory in nature; what I want to know is: 1) was there any critical discussion for modifications that involved:

1) Goal-tending [GT]---change to just make it a goaltend violation if ball hits the backboard on a try prior to being blocked regardless if the ball is still on the way upwards after said block contact? To my knowledge this is not a GT if B1 hits ball even after ball has made contact with backboard, provided said try for goal is still on the way up.

2) Ball gets lodged betw. ring and backboard on a try for goal---change to essentially consider this occurrence as the ball being inadvertently "put out-of-play" by the offensive team and then to allow the defensive team to get possession of the ball? To accomplish this without disturbing the AP arrow.

3) Foul Reporting mechanic ? To enable the Trail to be positioned opposite table during FT attempts so the Trail can better see who is subbing in and to better observe the score table for management purposes. Currently the mechanic has the Trail with his/her back to the score table, which is both inefficient and bad optics.

Or just use the NBA mechanic of having the Lead monitor for subs on free throws (this could apply to 2-man as well as 3-man).

*Good idea there!

**Also, to promote even more efficiency, have the Center ref hand the ball to the FT shooter as is done in the NBA. I would like to see this done by us; good optics there.

1) Lead should do this anyway (as should C).

2) Didn't we used to do this? or, maybe it was only two person.

Frankly, I don't see that either of these adds anything (nor are they particularly negative)

Anybody Remember The Twentieth Century ???
 

Two person NFHS trail, back in the mid to late twentieth century.

Possibly only first try (Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. will remember).

Always handed from the left side of the shooter.

For The Good Of The Cause ...
 

A throwin violation, or an out of bounds violation?

9-2-2: The ball shall be passed by the thrower directly into the court
from out-of-bounds so it touches or is touched by another player (inbounds
or out of bounds) on the court before going out of bounds untouched.[/QUOTE]

Any other comments for the good of the cause?

NFHS Goaltending ...
 

Correct, the NFHS rule and interpretation hasn't changed.

The backboard has nothing to do with goaltending. Goaltending is when a player touches the ball during a try, or tap, while it is in its downward flight, entirely above the basket ring level, outside the imaginary cylinder above the ring, and has the possibility of entering the basket. On most layups, the ball is going up immediately after it contacts the backboard, and in this situaion it is legal for a defender to touch the ball if it is not in the imaginary cylinder above the basket. Slapping the backboard is neither basket interference, nor is it goaltending, and points cannot be awarded. A player who strikes a backboard, during a tap, or a try, so forcefully that it cannot be ignored because it is an attempt to draw attention to the player, or a means of venting frustration, may be assessed a technical foul. When a player simply attempts to block a shot, and accidentally slaps the backboard, it is neither a violation, nor is it a technical foul.

Closure ...
 

Have esteemed Forum members come to a consensus that this is an out of bounds violation rather than a throwin violation?

Has this topic not generated a lot of debate because the answer is so clear and simple?

Two members say it's an out of bounds violation (bob jenkins, JRutledge, also add third member, BillyMac).

One member says it's a throwin violation (ilyazhito).

It seems simple to me, if the player never touches the ball after the ball has been throw-in, then what causes the ball to be out of bounds? That is your answer. We do not need consensus IMO.

I also do not know when the last time I have seen such a play BTW (if ever).

Peace

I have had that play a few times, where a throw-in goes out of bounds untouched. It is a throw-in violation, because the throw-in is not legally executed (the ball fails to touch a player inbounds other than the thrower-in). The same thing would apply if the thrower-in threw the ball inbounds and touched it himself before it touched or was touched by a teammate or opponent.

Out Of Bounds Violation ...
 

Agree 100%.

A1 inbounds the ball from the endline on a designated spot throwin. The ball passed by thrower A1 first touches player A2 who catches the throwin pass while standing on the out of bounds side of the sideline boundary near the division line.

But the rule states "inbounds or out of bounds".

9-2-2: The ball shall be passed by the thrower directly into the court
from out-of-bounds so it touches or is touched by another player (inbounds
or out of bounds) on the court before going out of bounds untouched.

For this reason, I believe it's an out of bounds violation, not a throwin violation. Team B's ball for a designated spot throwin at the sideline boundary near the division line.

Of course.

But it's not the question that was asked.

Not sure if I'm late for the party on this one, but has this 2007,08 Interpretation been cited?

SITUATION 3: During an alternating-possession throw-in for Team A, thrower A1 passes the ball directly on the court where it contacts (a) A2 or (b) B2, while he/she is standing on a boundary line. RULING: Out-of-bounds violation on (a) A2; (b) B2. The player was touched by the ball while out of bounds, thereby ending the throw-in. The alternating-possession arrow is reversed and pointed toward Team B's basket when the throw-in ends (when A2/B2 is touched by the ball). A throw-in is awarded at a spot nearest the out-of-bounds violation for (a) Team B; (b) Team A. (4-42-5; 6-4-4; 9-2-2; 9-3-2)

That is why I said if there was an interpretation I would be willing to change my mind. But obviously, if you think about it what else would it be if you really think of why we are calling the violation?

Peace

The "OOB violation" was the rule / interp for a number of years. Then, unexplainedly, NFHS changed it to "TI violation" -- probably just a year or so before Freddy's interp above. They quickly changed it back -- it's too bad they didn't follow this precedent on the "catching a ball in the BC" situation. ;)

Add my name.
It is an OUT OF BOUNDS violation.

Thank God Freddy's Not Dead ... ...
 

https://tse2.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.t...=0&w=300&h=300

Nice citation Freddy. Much thanks.

Correct.

For a while, in ancient times, the NFHS interpretation for the situation above, if player B2 caught the ball while standing on a boundary line, was that it was ruled a throwin violation of thrower A1 and then Team B received the ball for a designated spot throwin at the spot of the original throwin by A1.

Not any more.

My mantra has always been that it's not the rules that are difficult, it's the rule changes that are difficult, which is why I brought up this situation for confirmation earlier in the thread, back in post #71, after reading the 2019-20 Point of Emphasis on throwin violations.

Also, I'm not sure that "unexplainedly" is a real word, if it isn't, it should be, especially in regard to NFHS interpretations.

two rules questions
 

1. is there a CA or UTAH restricted arc this season?

2. 2 or 3 person, boys is there supposed to be a visible 10 second back court count? CA or UTAH?

So many videos now for 19-20 I see no 10 second count, especially for 3 person.

For NCAA-Men's, there is no visible 10 second backcourt count unless the shot clock is turned off. What rule set are CA and Utah using?