Rule Change Proposals
 

As the SRI for Oregon, I've made the following rule change proposals. Let me know what you think.

Proposal on undershirt colors
Change Type: Rule
Sport: Basketball
Rule: 3-5-6

Suggested Change:
ART. 6 . . . Undershirts must be white, black, beige, or a single solid color similar to the torso of the jersey and must be hemmed and not have frayed or ragged edges. If the undershirt has sleeves, they must be the same length. Only one visible logo is permitted. See 3-6 for logo requirements.

(optional variation): Undershirts, if worn, must be the same for all team members but need not match the wristbands, arm sleeves, and headbands).

Rationale:
We have two different color standards for accessories....one of headbands, arm sleeves, and wrist bands and another for undershirts. In particular, arm sleeves can can extend up to the arm pits. If such an item can be white/black/beige regardless of the jersey color, it seems reasonable to allow undershirts to also be white/black/beige.
Making this change would make it such that all accessories have the same color restrictions, simplifying the issue.

A variation of this could allow the undershirts to be either treated as an accessory, matching the headbands/wristbands OR matching the jersey color independent of the color of the wristbands/headbands.

Proposal on establishing team control while airborne and landing in the backcourt
Change Type: Editorial
Sport: Basketball
Rule: 9-9-3:

Suggested Change:

A player from a team that does not have team control During a jump ball, throw-in or while on defense, a player may legally jump from his/her frontcourt, secure control of the ball with both feet off the floor and return to the floor with one or both feet in the backcourt. The player may make a normal landing and it makes no difference whether the first foot down is in the frontcourt or backcourt.



Rationale:
The rule, as written, creates a few cases that lead to violations that are not within the spirit of the game. For example, if the ball is tipped on a throwin prior to a player securing control, the throw-in ends and the player subsequently catching the ball is at risk of committing a backcourt violation. Also, after a shot when there is no team control, a long rebound may put a player at risk of committing a backcourt violation in an effort to secure control of the ball.

This change allows a player to always establish team control without immediate risk of committing a backcourt violation. The rule, in a past version, allowed for something like this but the current wording makes these actions a violation.


Proposal on penalty for delaying the return to inbounds on a throwin
Change Type: Rule
Sport: Basketball
Rule: 10-4-2

Suggested Change:
Purposely and/or deceitfully delay returning after legally being out of bounds.
Add:
Rule 9-3-4: A player must not delay returning after legally being out of bounds.

Rationale:
When a player delays returning inbounds after executing a throw-in, the penalty of a technical foul is too severe. Several years ago, the penalty for leaving the court was a technical foul and was changed to be a violation. These two situations are essentially the same and should have the same penalty. Officials are hesitant to call a technical foul here due to the severity of the penalty not matching the nature of the infraction. Changing this to a violation would be better for consistency and for the game.



Proposal on Team Control Definition
Change Type: Editorial
Sport: Basketball
Rule: 4-12-2

Suggested Change:
DELETE: d. When a player of the team has disposal of the ball for a throw-in.


Rationale:
The change of the definition of team control to include throw-ins has caused no end of confusion with regards to other rules that depend on team control such as backcourt violations. As State Rules Interpreter, I've repeatedly had to explain that team control on a throw in is only for fouls, not for any other purpose. The NFHS also has recently published articles to that same effect. I believe the entire issue could be solved in a much more elegant manner.

Instead of having the definition of team control include throw-ins, it would be much less complicated to return to the prior definition of team control and then define a team control foul to include the time during a throw-in (it already does) in the same way a player control foul includes an airborne shooter. The rules and cases about team control could return to what they were prior to having a throw-in be part of team control while keeping the same result....no team control on a throw-in until a player inbounds establishes player control but no FTs for a foul committed by the throwin team either. This keeps from having all the other rules that depend on team/player control from having a bunch a confusing caveats about only being valid after the ball has been controlled inbounds.

Well written.

I’d rather get rid of the seatbelt rule than have any of those changes, however.

Why not push for both sets of rule changes?

Just for counterbalance, and because you've flogged this horse several times over the past couple of days -- I'm in favor of keeping the seatbelt rule.

Fashion Police ...
 

Undershirts.

Do what you will with other "equipment" colors, but keep the undershirt rule the same as it currently is.

While the present undershirt rule is the strictest of all fashion rules (only two choices: white, or jersey color), it's also the simplest for everyone (officials, coaches, players, parents who purchase undershirts) to understand, and the simplest to adjudicate.

When I'm watching for rebounding action contact, I don't want opponents to have the same color undershirts, and I want undershirts (if worn) to match the jerseys. I have various undershirt colors in scrimmages every year. They can be slightly distracting. I don't want that in real games.

Rules that restrict equipment colors benefit officials by allowing them to easily identify players on each team during fast paced action.

Glad the NFHS got rid of the "school color" option a few years ago.

Delay Return ...
 

Delaying the return to inbounds on a throwin.

I twice offered this to the NFHS as a formal proposal (with the exact same rationale), this past year it made it's way all the way to the rules committee for final consideration. Didn't make it past committee. Dead end. Maybe if we just keep hammering away. Hopefully third time will be the charm. Good luck.

Double Barreled Negative Interaction ...
 

In theory, I like the "seatbelt rule". My problem with the rule is when head coaches have to be "reminded" to not stand and coach. It adds an extra layer of possible negative interaction between the officials and the head coach, a relationship that has already been "strained". I only favor getting rid of the "seatbelt rule" because it would also get rid of this "double barreled" negative interaction.

Give the opponents two free throws, add the technical foul to the coaches total, and play on, he's been punished enough.

All of Camron’s rule change proposals make sense, which means that the NFHS won’t adopt any of them.

NFHS Burn ...
 

My nomination for "Post O' The Week".

Is there a law that says that the NFHS shall only adopt nonsensical rules proposals :p?

Don't give a damn about uniform clarifications. Stop having officials adjudicate this kind of silliness.

The other rules do not move me, but they are OK. They can change definitions and still not define the actions properly in the Casebook or interpretation.

And keep the seatbelt rule, gets them to think about why that took place.

Peace

The Greatest Show On Earth ...
 

Uniforms, or equipment?

While, like most, I hate being the fashion police, I don't want my high school game becoming the Wild Wild West, or a the Ringling Brothers and Barnum and Bailey Circus.

Want to be a basketball player? Dress the part.

Many rules regarding undershirts, headbands, wristbands, arm sleeves, knee sleeves, lower leg sleeves, knee pads, elbow pads, compression shorts, tights, hair control devices, and ribbons need to be either much more simplified, or eliminated.

(I like undershirt colors just the way they are now.)

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

First Thing ...
 

Get rid of beige as a legal equipment color choice.

Hey NFHS, 2008 called and it wants it beige underwrap back.

It's 2021. Underwrap, often used by girls as a headband, now comes in a variety of colors, not just beige (as in the past).

Most team now have underwrap in the same color as the jersey.

Keep equipment colors simple. Black, white, or the predominant color of the jersey.

When was the last time anyone spotted a beige arm sleeve, leg sleeve, headband, wristband, compression shorts, or tights?

If it's irrelevant and out of date, eliminate it. Keep it simple stupid.

(Note: 3M™ patented Coban™ underwrap in 1992 and beige was the only color available at the time.)

https://tse3.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.u...=0&w=300&h=300

If it is not about safety, why do I care what type of headband someone has on their head? If the jersey is the same color and style, their undershirt means nothing to me. If people can have different skin colors, it is really hard to know what is on their arms? There was a time that the NF tried to legislate tattoos on the arm or body and then that went away quickly. But worrying about the color and logo of things the school does not provide is silly. That will not change because people assume there will be all these different styles.

Peace

Unwilling Fashion Police ...
 

Agree with you that the NFHS has turned us into mostly unwilling fashion police. The pendulum has swung to far too one side. However I don't want the pendulum to swing so far to the other side that high school basketball looks no different than lower level basketball (recreation, travel, AAU, YMCA, etc.).

We absolutely need some common sense changes that simplify (and possibly eliminate) many of these rules, but these changes must still restrict equipment colors to benefit officials by allowing them to easily identify players on each team during fast paced action.

Easy start. Ignore everything from the waist down (leg sleeves, knee pads, tights, compression shorts), just as we now ignore shorts, socks, and shoes (except for flashing lights).

Headbands, wristbands, arm sleeves? Make it simpler. Black, white, jersey color (no beige), all the same for the team. Want it even simpler? Any color, but all the same for the team.

A stripe on an arm sleeve? Fuhgeddaboudit, the issue is not worth the time, energy, or mental effort.

Logos? Let's not allow players to be become billboards. Unless we change our minds and want to allow this to raise money for interscholastic sports (à la WNBA, international, etc.).

Undershirts? When I'm watching for rebounding action contact by multiple players, I don't want opponents to have the same color undershirts, and I want undershirts to match the jerseys (treated as an extension of the jersey). I have various undershirt colors in preseason scrimmages every year. They can be slightly distracting. I don't want that in real games.

I like undershirt color rules just the way they are now, strict (only two choices, white, or jersey color), but simple to understand, and simple to enforce (if we all did it, we can be our own worst enemies, if 95% of us strictly enforced this in the first week and a half in December, the problem would go away, like herd immunity).

What am I missing? What are the two choices???

Yeah, I Know, Road Jersey Colors Can Be A Lot Of Colors ...
 

I apologize for being so "loose" with my language (fixed it).

White, or road jersey color.

Two choices for most individual teams (unless they have multiple road jerseys (remember this is only high school)).

Reminded me that changing "light color" to "white" for the home team, and getting rid of all references to "school color", were great NHFS fashion police rule changes.

At least they've tried to simplify some of these rules, but unfortunately it was one step forward, one step backyard.

https://tse3.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.P...=0&w=300&h=300

I really only see that as one option since the team's home/away status dictates which one they can wear if they wear one.

The point of my proposal, knowing they're not getting rid of the uniform stuff, was not a clarification but an actual change to loosen the restrictions and make it both less confusing and, as an added benefit, less that we have to worry about since more options would be legal.

Strict ...
 

Get it. Like I said, "strict".

We Don't Need No Stinking Badges ...
 

https://tse3.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.S...=0&w=170&h=161

Agree. This is utterly ridiculous:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...r7jfevVSE/edit

I'll Be Here All Week Folks, Enjoy The All You Can Eat Shrimp Buffet ...
 

And my point is we do not need more changes to this rule. I get it and I just wish this was not in our hands or in some other bucket that can be dealt with. Just saying schools do not provide these things just like they do not provide socks and somehow we survive.

Peace

Don't Want To A Fashion Police Officer Or A Circus Ringmaster ...
 

So you like the fashion rules as they currently are? Not me. Too complex, and confusing for many players, coaches and a few officials. Many not needed (little or nothing to do with the game of basketball, or officiating the game of basketball).

And many officials are between a rock and a hard place. Enforce fashion rules and one may be considered overly officious and criticized by coaches ("John Smith didn't enforce this last week."), and possibly by partners (rolling eyes). Ignore them and one may be criticized by others (blaming widespread use of illegal equipment on the lack of enforcement by those that ignore), some of whom may be promotion observers. Lose. Lose.

Make the fashion rules short and sweet (simple and needed) making it easy for everybody to enforce them (and to want to enforce them).

We need simple equipment rules that make equipment safe and make it easy (not just possible, but easy) to identify players on each team during fast paced action.

Wouldn't you even consider this change? It's got to make things better than they currently are, because it can't get any worse.

No lights (Casebook 3.5 Situation B), or springs (or rockets) on shoes (equipment which is designed to increase a team member’s height or vertical reach or to gain a competitive advantage must not be permitted). Knee braces (unaltered from the manufacturer’s original design) must be safe. Completely ignore everything else from the waist down. Easy peasy lemon squeezy.

What unintended consequences (a usual NFHS modus operandi) am I missing here?

https://tse4.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.v...=0&w=300&h=300

One Step At A Time ...
 

I said we do not need more changes. Another change will just be more confusing. At least now the undershirt can "try" to match the jersey. In CR's proposal, he is changing the current requirement to mirror other rules, but will likely still have different items used. That is usually the last thing to deal with in the uniform situation when addressed early.

Peace

Did I miss something somewhere?? I thought there was no choice - the only option was “similar to the jersey color”. If a kid has a black jersey, white ain’t gonna cut it in my book.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No, but precedents would seem to indicate this is how they roll.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Packing A Bag ...
 

Two choices as the kid is packing his bag for the game, or preparing to dress for the game: White undershirt for a home game. Jersey color undershirt for a road game.

More Confusing ???
 

How could a change to completely ignoring (with very few exceptions regarding safety, illegal advantage, or inappropriate) everything from the waist down be deemed "more confusing" than the current rules we already have regarding leg sleeves, knee pads, tights, and compression shorts (four legal colors (including jersey color), solid colors only, all the same for a player, all the same for the team, logo size and number, knee pad or knee brace).

I know a few guys who still believe that compression shorts must be the same color as the uniform shorts, and who believe that a knee pad is adjudicated the same as a knee brace.

Undershirts ...
 

I apologize for not fully understanding your earlier posts.

Are you saying that there are no changes needed only in the equipment rule regarding undershirts? And that any change in the current undershirt rule would be confusing?

If that's the case, I agree 99.9% (with the distaste that I have for enforcing all the fashion rules, there's got to be something (0.1%) that I don't like about the current undershirt rule, but I can't think of it right now).

Freddy is the Forum "fashion expert". Hey Freddy, what say you about the current undershirt rule. Any suggested changes needed to make it better, simpler, and easier to enforce (keeping in mind the need to make it easy (not just possible, but easy) to identify players on each team during fast paced action, especially crowded rebounding action)?

https://tse4.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.3...=0&w=167&h=166

Does any of this affect how teams play? Are we really struggling to know who is on the court and what team they play for? So why do we need more rules or distinctions about what headband someone wears and does it fit the standard or not the standard of another item like an undershirt? Because if you read CR's proposal, it seems like he wants to make the color restriction the exact same as the other items, but not have to match those other items. All I am saying is why do we need that distinction too? I do not see the need. I will do whatever is requested but seems like another unnecessary layer like requiring logos restrictions on socks like they did in the mid-90s for like one year. It was dumb then and it is dumb now to be worried about what color and arm sleeve are when we know that kids are different colors and shapes themselves.

Peace

Happy Medium ...
 

Good question. And this is the purpose (other than safety, and a few other things) of most of the equipment rules, to easily identify players on each team

The NFHS needs to find a "happy medium".

On one side of the spectrum one could find overly strict complex rules that are difficult for players, coaches, and some officials, to understand, and for some officials to enforce, but make it extremely easy to identify teams, probably beyond what officials need to easily and effectively officiate the game of basketball. Or even simple rules that are extremely strict, like all forms of equipment having the same color as the jersey. Is an extremely strict rule like this necessary for officials to easily and effectively officiate the game of basketball?

On the other side of the spectrum one could find extremely relaxed rules that are quite easy for players, coaches, and officials, to understand, and for all officials to enforce, but make it possibly somewhat difficult to identify teams during fast paced action, especially crowded rebounding situations, making officials possibly somewhat less effective, and making it possibly somewhat more difficult, to officiate the game of basketball.

Has the NFHS found the middle of the spectrum balance point? Easy to understand? Easy to enforce? Easy to identify players on each team? In my opinion, no, no, no, yes.

The NFHS should keep the current uniform (jerseys, colors, numbers) rules in place, and keep the current undershirt rules (white or jersey color) in place (as an extension of the jersey), and simplify, or eliminate, the other equipment rules regarding headbands, wristbands, arm sleeves, knee sleeves, lower leg sleeves, knee pads, elbow pads, compression shorts, and tights.

My opinion: Headbands, wristbands, arm sleeves, elbow pads? Little change. Simplify. Three (down from four) color choices (black, white, jersey color), all the same for a player, all the same for the team. Or, if desired, eliminate such rules completely (if one doesn't mind being the ringmaster at the circus).

My opinion: Knee sleeves, lower leg sleeves, knee pads, compression shorts, and tights? No rules. Ignore (like shoes and socks).

I don't believe that by ignoring everything from the waist down will make it significantly more difficult to easily identify players on each team.

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qim...5f6c9e5aa71a-c

The Worst Is Over, It Can't Get Any Worse ...
 

The pendulum is on the way, be it slowly, back to center. Over the past several years the NFHS has, in my opinion, made some good common sense decisions regarding uniforms and equipment. Allowing tights. Compression shorts don't have to be the same color as the uniform shorts. Eliminated "school color" equipment language. Allowing "volleyball width" headbands for basketball. Allowing rolled waistbands. White instead of "light" color home jerseys. Jersey number can't be the same color as the jersey (2024-25).

Maybe the NFHS will allow the pendulum to keep swinging. Let's hope.

https://tse4.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.G...=0&w=300&h=300

Take The Ribbon From Your Hair (Kris Kristofferson, 1970) …
 

Not saying that I've agreed with all recent NFHS decisions regarding equipment: Headbands not allowed to have tails. Clarified ribbons illegal as a hair control device.

Both decisions, especially the first, make my job more difficult.

Found out that my rule change proposals didn't make the NFHS list because my state office Rep didn't forward them on in time. :/

Admin T for failing to submit roster on time.

NFHS Rule Committee Finalists ???
 

Do you know what changes are on the agenda at the NFHS Rule Committee ?

Or is this one of those ...

https://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.B...=0&w=321&h=175

Here is the list (paraphrased/abbreviated....too long to paste in here):

1. Stop the clock under a minute.
2. Shot clock (a) nationally or (b) by state adoption
3. Uniform color...dark must be dark
4 & 5. religious head covering regulations without needing state approval
6. 2 shots starting at 5th foul in each quarter
7. 2 shots starting at 5th foul in each quarter (similar to #6 but different wording by different propoent)
8. Bonus at 6th foul in a quarter, automatic bonus at 8th foul in a quarter
9. New definition of a simultaneous multiple foul...two fouls by same team against different opposing players
10. No jump ball in OT...continue AP.
11. Remove coaches ability to be granted a timeout during a live ball...must be by a player.
12. On a double foul where one foul is of a greater severity than the other, possession to team offended by greater foul.
13. Eliminate player control signal...use only team control signal

Liver Pills, Apples, And Coffee ...
 

Thanks Camron Rust.

1. Stop the clock under a minute.
No. More chances for clock mistakes in important situations. Many games below the varsity level (especially middle schools) are timed by inexperienced adults, or students.

2. Shot clock (a) nationally or (b) by state adoption
I assume that either is an option, not mandatory. Many games below the varsity level are timed by inexperienced adults, or students. Connecticut already uses a shot clock for varsity prep school games and we always have problems.

3. Uniform color...dark must be dark
Odd change. Rules already state white for the home team and a contrasting dark color for the visiting team.

4 & 5. religious head covering regulations without needing state approval
Yes. Here in Connecticut we currently allow this and then subsequently suggest that the team get state approval after the game. No officials in Connecticut currently will not allow a player to participate because of religion unless there is a real safety issue.

6. 2 shots starting at 5th foul in each quarter
No. Doubles the chances for certain types of correctable errors. Many games below the varsity level (especially middle schools) are scored by inexperienced adults, or students; and many middle school scoreboards don't show team fouls.

7. 2 shots starting at 5th foul in each quarter (similar to #6 but different wording by different proponent)
No. Doubles the chances for certain types of correctable errors. Many games below the varsity level (especially middle schools) are scored by inexperienced adults, or students; and many middle school scoreboards don't show team fouls.

8. Bonus at 6th foul in a quarter, automatic bonus at 8th foul in a quarter
No. Doubles the chances for certain types of correctable errors. Many games below the varsity level (especially middle schools) are scored by inexperienced adults, or students; and many middle school scoreboards don't show team fouls.

9. New definition of a simultaneous multiple foul...two fouls by same team against different opposing players
Probably needed, or they wouldn't consider it.

10. No jump ball in OT...continue AP.
Yes. The beginning of the end of the jump ball. Hey Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. How do you like them apples?

11. Remove coaches ability to be granted a timeout during a live ball...must be by a player.
Yes. Saves a lot of problems where players are scrambling on the floor to get control of a ball, usually right before a probable held ball, where officials should be concentrating on the physicality of the players involved, not having to identify the voice of the head coach. One less thing officials have to worry about in these, and similar tense situations.

12. On a double foul where one foul is of a greater severity than the other, possession to team offended by greater foul.
No. Not needed. But I would be open to a discussion of "fairness".

13. Eliminate player control signal...use only team control signal
Yes. Here in my little corner of Connecticut we currently have more player control foul signals than Carter has Little Liver Pills.

And those are my opinions ...

https://tse4.explicit.bing.net/th?id...=0&w=229&h=166

Meh!!!

I see nothing that I feel need to be added or I feel so adamant about that it must be struck down. I think I would be OK with all of them changing or all of them not being added.

Peace

My vote on these items:

1. Stop the clock under a minute.
Yes...eliminates clock gamesmanship in the last critical seconds of a game.

2. Shot clock (a) nationally or (b) by state adoption
OK. I suggested (a), which was a mandatory change, only if the timeline were several years. (b) state adoption is good as each state can control the adoption.

3. Uniform color...dark must be dark
No. I didn't give you the full wording, but I see it as unnecessary.


4 & 5. religious head covering regulations without needing state approval
No. Is already allowed through state approval. As is, it prevents a player from suddenly becoming religious and wearing a spaghetti colander on his or her head.


6. 2 shots starting at 5th foul in each quarter
No. Unneeded. 1+1 has been around for decades and it works

7. 2 shots starting at 5th foul in each quarter (similar to #6 but different wording by different proponent)
No. Unneeded. 1+1 has been around for decades and it works

8. Bonus at 6th foul in a quarter, automatic bonus at 8th foul in a quarter
Big No....do they want to clean up rough play or not...this more or less would make it open season to foul.

9. New definition of a simultaneous multiple foul...two fouls by same team against different opposing players
Yes.

10. No jump ball in OT...continue AP.
No...the jump ball starts the OT more equitably, particularly if you have a team that is inclined to stall.

11. Remove coaches ability to be granted a timeout during a live ball...must be by a player.
YES!!

12. On a double foul where one foul is of a greater severity than the other, possession to team offended by greater foul.
OK.

13. Eliminate player control signal...use only team control signal
YES
[/QUOTE]

First Amendment ...
 

I'll give you my spaghetti colander when you pry it from my cold, dead head.

https://tse3.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.g...=0&w=256&h=165

Can't Teach Tall ...
 

... or have one team that is inclined to use their seven foot one inch tall player, as we do here in Connecticut.

When this kid showed up at his door three years ago, I'm sure that the coach got in contact with every really old retired coach he could find to learn all the old jump ball trick plays that were used before the alternating possession arrow was invented.

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

1. Yes. It eliminates the potential for clock-related tomfoolery (e.g. the winning team "helping" the old Lead official by passing the ball to him after a score) near the end of the game, especially a close game. I had to give a technical foul to a player late in a tournament game because he was in the way of an opponent trying to get to the ball for a throw-in, and wouldn't listen when I told him to knock it off. This would not happen under the proposed rule.
2. I would agree with a) if there is a phase-in period (GA is currently phasing the shot clock in, and will allow it to be used in regular season play starting this upcoming season (2021-22). It will be mandatory next season (2022-23) for regular and postseason varsity games). I would agree with b), because each state should be able to figure out an equitable way to adopt the shot clock.
3. No.
4 and 5, sure as long as there is no safety issue.
6. If the one-and-one is eliminated, absolutely.
7. Same as above.
8. No
9. Yes
10. No
11-13 Yes

Rule Change Proposals
 

Agree with all of Camron’s positions, except note that:

6-7, I’m indifferent. If adopted, states like MN and WI that play in halves would have some decisions to make.

9, Yes, but the term could be easily confused with other foul types, so I suggest a distinct term, such as “plural foul.” Also, would need to determine the penalty assessment for such a situation.

12. While we’re at at, let’s give FTs to the more offended team, just as is in the NCAA rule.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk