2019-2020 NCAA Rules Changes

[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

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[Fan10]

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'm just a fan here, but I read these boards regularly in order to gain a better understanding of the rules.

I was sitting in the stands at a D1 game recently when basket interference was ruled on a dunk tip in. The officials went to the monitor, and I immediately remembered this thread in which there seemed to be a consensus that the bucket cannot count.

After a lengthy review, the referee stepped out in front of the scorer's table and gave the "no basket" signal. The ball was then given to the defense.
The arrow was in favor of the offense, but since the call stood, this was irrelevant.

While I obviously can't read the minds of the officials, the fact that the referee gave the "no basket" signal led me to believe that the basket would have counted if the call had been overturned. Has anybody heard if there is a provision for counting the basket? While I've never been on the floor, I personally think that by the time that the official sees what he believes is a touch while the ball is in the cylinder, processes that info, and blows his whistle, most of the time, the ball is already through the net, which would make the whistle irrelevant since it comes after the bucket. I believe that is what happened here because I did not hear the whistle until after I saw the ball go through the net (though I could have not heard it when it first sounded).

I was just wondering if there was a provision to count the basket. And, if so, does it have to be a situation where the whistle did not come until after the ball was through the net?

[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

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by rwodar

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

This is just a press release basically. I am going to wait for the actual rules and A.Rs for the idiosyncrasies of the rule before worrying about those things. I am going to assume this was likely well thought out as the NCAA will do a much better job than the NF for example. You do raise an interesting question or concern.

Peace

[Raymond]

From the NCAA:

"Rule 11-2.1.e.3 now permits officials to use instant replay in the last 2 minutes of the second period or the last 2 minutes of any overtime period to determine if basket interference/goaltending has occurred. However, a review is only permitted after a call has been made on the floor. The following lay situations are intended to clarify the application of this rule:

1. BI/GT is called on the defense and the shot is unsuccessful. After review, the officials confirm that the call was correct. Ruling – Count the basket and award the ball to the defense along the end line.

2. BI/GT is called on the defense and the shot is successful. Ruling – No need to review. Count the basket and award possession to the defense.

3. BI/GT called on the defense and the shot is unsuccessful. After review, the officials determine that there has been no violation. Ruling – First determine if there was player possession when the official blew his whistle. Award the ball to the team in control. If there is no team control, use the alternating possession arrow.

4. BI is called on the offense. The basket is successful or unsuccessful. After review, the officials determine that the call was correct. Ruling – Disallow the basket and award possession to the defense.

5. BI is called on the offense. After review, the officials determine that the call was incorrect. Ruling – If the try was successful, count the basket and award possession to the defense. If the try was unsuccessful, determine if there was team possession at the time the official blew his whistle. If there was no team possession, use the alternating possession arrow.

6. BI is called on the defense. After review, the officials determine that BI should be called on the offense. Ruling - Officials may wipe off the defensive BI call and call the BI against the offense. The goal shall not count. Award possession to the defense.

7. BI is called on the offense. After revue, the officials determine that BI should be called on the defense. Ruling- Officials may wipe off the offensive BI call and call the BI against the defense. The goal shall count. Award possession to the defense."

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk