2019-2020 NCAA Rules Changes

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by dahoopref

It'll be interesting how play will be resumed when a BI/GT is ruled on the floor but the monitor review shows that the call was IC.
...

The release already states how it will be handled.

"In the last two minutes of the second period or the last two minutes of any overtime period, allow the use of instant replay to review basket interference and goaltending when a call has been made. After such review, in the event of an officiating error, the alternating possession arrow shall be used to determine possession. "

[dahoopref]

Originally Posted by Raymond

The release already states how it will be handled.

"In the last two minutes of the second period or the last two minutes of any overtime period, allow the use of instant replay to review basket interference and goaltending when a call has been made. After such review, in the event of an officiating error, the alternating possession arrow shall be used to determine possession. "

Thank you for clarifying. I didn't open the document previously but am now better informed.

[JRutledge]

This new shirt is already becoming a nightmare. It seems like NAIA will leave it up to the conferences to make the decision as to what to wear for this year but in 2020-21 then they are required. Still, have not heard which of my NAIA conferences that I work will do either way. Just got a memo from the NAIA which is not requiring anything this year.

Peace

[Kansas Ref]

The optics are not good when you have different shirts being worn by members of the crew at the same game. One of our evaluators even said as much, when he sees highschool refs officiating and one is wearing the 3 inch side panel shirt whereas other ref(s) are wearing the non-paneled shirt. I can only imagine how optically-displeasing it will be for him if a highschool ref has a ragland shirt and the partner has the normal shirt---yikes.

[Matt S.]

Originally Posted by Kansas Ref

The optics are not good when you have different shirts being worn by members of the crew at the same game. One of our evaluators even said as much, when he sees highschool refs officiating and one is wearing the 3 inch side panel shirt whereas other ref(s) are wearing the non-paneled shirt. I can only imagine how optically-displeasing it will be for him if a highschool ref has a ragland shirt and the partner has the normal shirt---yikes.

That's the whole point--NCAA M is trying to differentiate itself. NCAAW officials typically don't wear side panel shirts...if they do, the crew must match, per the CCA manual.

High school officials shouldn't be buying the new shirt, period.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Kansas Ref

The optics are not good when you have different shirts being worn by members of the crew at the same game. One of our evaluators even said as much, when he sees highschool refs officiating and one is wearing the 3 inch side panel shirt whereas other ref(s) are wearing the non-paneled shirt. I can only imagine how optically-displeasing it will be for him if a highschool ref has a ragland shirt and the partner has the normal shirt---yikes.

That sounds like another issue if the state or association does not set some guidelines. We were told in Illinois a long time ago that we are not to wear the side-panel shirt in a high school game (and the same with Indiana). So you have to wear a basic striped shirt. The only issue we have here is that they allow a different kind of patch on our IHSA shirts that are allowed and they did not require all officials to be the same, which I am OK with BTW. We do not make enough money to have officials required to go buy multiple shirts IMO. At least at the college level, we are making at least double or triple amount for what a shirt cost during a single game. So if they make the change we are not out a ton of money, but it is still an inconvenient expense.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Raymond

The release already states how it will be handled.

"In the last two minutes of the second period or the last two minutes of any overtime period, allow the use of instant replay to review basket interference and goaltending when a call has been made. After such review, in the event of an officiating error, the alternating possession arrow shall be used to determine possession. "

This new rule seems to have a least one hole...

Arrow to B. After a try by A1, A5 dunks the ball on a rebound/put-back. An official calls BI on the offense (A) and cancels the basket. Upon review, the BI is overturned. Since the BI call made the ball dead at the time of the suspected infraction, and there is no mention of now counting the goal doesn't seem to be counted.. B gets the ball due to the AP arrow. If the goal was to be counted, why would you go to the arrow?

That doesn't seem at all just. A loses the points and the ball or A gets the points and might get the ball (if they have the arrow).

While there was clearly a need for a change, I don't think this is quite right.

Similarly, it is not just for a defender grabbing a rebound that is called for BI and it isn't. The defender obtained possession. It shouldn't go to the arrow when there is immediate possession that was believed to be BI/GT.

[bucky]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

This new rule seems to have a least one hole...

Arrow to B. After a try by A1, A5 dunks the ball on a rebound/put-back. An official calls BI on the offense (A) and cancels the basket. Upon review, the BI is overturned. Since the BI call made the ball dead at the time of the suspected infraction, and there is no mention of now counting the goal doesn't seem to be counted.. B gets the ball due to the AP arrow. If the goal was to be counted, why would you go to the arrow?

That doesn't seem at all just. A loses the points and the ball or A gets the points and might get the ball (if they have the arrow).

While there was clearly a need for a change, I don't think this is quite right.

Similarly, it is not just for a defender grabbing a rebound that is called for BI and it isn't. The defender obtained possession. It shouldn't go to the arrow when there is immediate possession that was believed to be BI/GT.

I think it should be a delayed violation until any player on the floor gains control or the next dead ball, whichever comes first. On a put back like a tip dunk, review after ball goes through hoop (dead ball). If incorrect call, give ball to other team with baseline privileges. If no immediate put back, wait until player possession on the floor, then review. If incorrect call, allow rebounding team to retain possession. If call correct, add elapsed time. Mechanic for delayed violation could be pointing at the rim area. Stupid idea? Thoughts?

New shirts/jackets, lol. Another way for someone to make more money. Scam city. Don't get me started on soccer jerseys.

Originally Posted by MechanicGuy

I don't like using the term "flopping" in the text of the rule. Opens the rule up to too much interpretation, compared to "faking being fouled."

"To penalize flopping/faking being fouled by players...."

They are used interchangeably. Besides, both words end in "ing", which means they are open to interpretation.

"Following a call by an official involving either swinging of the elbows (cylinder play) or a hook and hold play,
the official may use instant replay to review and adjudicate the play by removing fouls, assessing fouls or
concluding that no foul occurred."

Well, during any type of may-have-been-illegal contact, just blow the whistle and know that you have a free pass to adjudicate. It's like the ultimate delayed call.

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by Kansas Ref

The optics are not good when you have different shirts being worn by members of the crew at the same game. One of our evaluators even said as much, when he sees highschool refs officiating and one is wearing the 3 inch side panel shirt whereas other ref(s) are wearing the non-paneled shirt. I can only imagine how optically-displeasing it will be for him if a highschool ref has a ragland shirt and the partner has the normal shirt---yikes.

I really don't think many people other than refs notice or care whether a crew is mismatched with respect to side panels. Same with American flags. Not something people need to lose sleep over.

It's moot anyway since most states have gone to their "own" shirt in the past five years or so. (South Carolina's shirt is basically the new NCAA shirt but with wider stripes - it looks horrible.) Not sure how many states are still 1-inch stripes with no logo/patch.

[ilyazhito]

MPSSAA (MD) is the 1-inch black and white shirt with the state association logo on the right sleeve. IAABO boards in the state have dye-sublimated shirts with the IAABO logo on the chest, MD logo on the right sleeve, and flag on the left sleeve (all boards except Board 12), or on the back. Board 134 wears grey shirts, except for State playoff games.

DC is the standard NFHS shirt, plus the DCSAA patch on the right sleeve (unless an association chooses to use its own custom shirt).

I think the new NCAA shirt looks weird, but I'll have to wear it to work college games, so I'll just order it and not lose any sleep over it.

IMO, the consequence for BI/GT plays that are reviewed should be the normal consequence of the play being adjudicated correctly (if the result of the review is to count the goal, B gets the ball for a throw-in with the right to run the endline), or the AP arrow, if there was no GT/BI, but the shot did not score.

[SC Official]

Interesting. Women's is actually changing to the high school rule.

"To change the penalty for technical fouls listed in Rules 10-12.3 (Player/Substitute Technical Fouls) and 10-12.4 (Bench Technical Fouls)
to include awarding the ball to the offended team at the division line opposite the scorers’ table."

[frezer11]

I work some games at the JUCO level, and our assigner has already confirmed that we WILL be wearing the new shirt, though not the new jacket. I for one love the look of the traditional referee shirt, so this is an unfortunate change.

[rwodar]

2-11.6

“Reset the shot-clock to 20 seconds after an offensive team rebound that does not go into the backcourt before team control is gained by the offensive team.”

This verbiage seems ambiguous, what happens if the defensive tips a missed shot that hit the rim out of bounds in the front court? The verbiage does not answer that question l.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by rwodar

2-11.6

“Reset the shot-clock to 20 seconds after an offensive team rebound that does not go into the backcourt before team control is gained by the offensive team.”

This verbiage seems ambiguous, what happens if the defensive tips a missed shot that hit the rim out of bounds in the front court? The verbiage does not answer that question l.

I do not think it makes much difference as it wouldn't before the defense rebounds the ball but there are a bunch of tips and deflections, but you only reset the clock to 30 for the defense when they get control of the ball. The shot clock is not supposed to continue even after the ball hits the rim, reset then continue again. So I would think the rule is there to reset once the offense secures the actual rebound. That is just a guess and that is what I thought I saw all year with the NBA as this is basically an NBA rule on some level but with a deferent reset time.

Peace

[rwodar]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do not think it makes much difference as it wouldn't before the defense rebounds the ball but there are a bunch of tips and deflections, but you only reset the clock to 30 for the defense when they get control of the ball. The shot clock is not supposed to continue even after the ball hits the rim, reset then continue again. So I would think the rule is there to reset once the offense secures the actual rebound. That is just a guess and that is what I thought I saw all year with the NBA as this is basically an NBA rule on some level but with a deferent reset time.



Peace

You’re right about the NBA, but the NBA rule also specifies this. This verbiage does not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk