New Rules 2021-2022 Announced

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Rule 3-5-4e was added to allow players to wear head coverings for religious reasons without obtaining state association approval. The head covering shall not be made of abrasive or hard materials and must be attached so that it is highly unlikely to come off during play.

Originally Posted by Stat-Man

The rule change allowing head coverings for religious reasons without state-level approval is a good idea in that it removes extra paperwork and the potential gotchas if a team never got that approval and suddenly found the rule strictly enforced -- especially in the post season (which I want to say actually happened somewhere within the past few seasons).

Connecticut has already been doing this for the past few years. Allow the player to play that night. Suggest the coach or athletic director contact the state association. Next game: Allow the player to play that night. Suggest the coach or athletic director contact the state association. Next game: Allow the player to play that night. Suggest the coach or athletic director contact the state association. Rinse and repeat all season long, especially through the state tournament.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

The official signals were also modified to use the same hand signal for a player control foul and a team control foul. Officials should use Signal 36, which is a hand placed at the back of the head, for both types of fouls.

Originally Posted by Stat-Man

I like and prefer the punch for offensive fouls more than the PC signal. That said, I'm willing to bet that the NFHS decision is based on NCAA-M adopting the same signal for all PC & TC fouls. For better or worse, a number of changes from NCAA-M tend to trickle down at some point to the NFHS level.

It's the Wild Wild West here in my little corner of Connecticut where we have more player control foul signals than Carter has Little Liver Pills. Many use some form of the "fist punch" for a player control foul signal. For that reason I was hoping that the NFHS would go to the "fist punch" as the combined player/team control foul signal.

Now, with the signal change, I can't wait to see what signals Connecticut officials use for player control fouls and team control fouls next year.

[ilyazhito]

Finally, the shot clock is approved by state association adoption in NFHS. It de facto legalizes those states that had adopted it without permission, and now gives other states the opportunity to use it in their games. I'll be interested to see how it comes into play in the VHSL, especially because many VA teams play DC and MD teams that use it in their games on their side of the river.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

.... I'll be interested to see how it comes into play in the VHSL, especially because many VA teams play DC and MD teams that use it in their games on their side of the river.

That is a very small portion of the state of Virginia. The hotbeds of Virginia basketball are in the Richmond area, the Hampton Roads area where I live, and out in rural Southwestern Virginia. And there are a lot of underfunded public schools in those three regions in need of infrastructure and facility upgrades.



Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

... there are a lot of underfunded public schools ...

While it still may be too expensive for some schools, two inexpensive (cheap) shot clocks can be purchased in the $600 - $1000 range. No bells and whistles, and the instruction manual may be poorly translated from Mandarin to English, but they will get the job done. Schools can save money on shipping using Amazon Prime.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

While it still may be too expensive for some schools, two inexpensive (cheap) shot clocks can be purchased in the $600 - $1000 range. No bells and whistles, and the instruction manual may be poorly translated from Mandarin to English, but they will get the job done. Schools can save money on shipping using Amazon Prime.

Or upgrade with a local sponsor.

[JRutledge]

I think in many places it will take local sponsors to provide the equipment. Really I do not think the issue will be the one in the main gyms, but we have a lot of schools that have a fieldhouse or another campus they play on (girls on one campus for basketball and boys at another). I think that might be the concern. But if they want to make it happen, it will happen. It just will not be cheap.

Peace

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I am a purest, which means I am against a Shot Clock at any level: NFHS, NCAA Men's and Women's, NBA and WNBA, and FIBA.

That said, my 46 years officiating included 34 years officiating games that utilized a Shot Clock: 34 years (women's college: AIAW, NCAA, NAIA, NJCAA), 15 years (men's jr. college: NCAA Div. III junior varsity and NJCAA), 2 years (girls' H.S. in California: CIF), and 10 years (USA Basketball, FIBA Rules) and I never had a problem officiaiting a game in which a Shot Clock was used.

I just do not see the need for a Shot Clock for basketball below the college level. High school coaches cannot recruit (I know, I know, but that is a discussion for another time.); they are, for the most part dependent upon the quaility of the students that reside in their school district and the ability to control the Ball is an factor that can level the playing field. I think that a Shot Clock at the high school level is a solution in search of a problem.

Just my two cents.

MTD, Sr.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

... dependent upon the quality of the students that reside in their school district and the ability to control the ball is a factor that can level the playing field ...

Agree. Gives athletically disadvantaged teams who may be coached to play a little more conservative at least a chance to be competitive.

More than one way to skin a cat, more than one way win a basketball game.

Who died and became the king of basketball and decided that the bigger, taller, faster, great defense, great ball handling, great shooting, longer bench team is supposed to win 100% of the time.

Shouldn't good coaching, players wanting to learn to win, and "basketball smarts" play some role in possibly winning a game?

As a former player, a former coach, and a current official, I have never been bored by slow down "chess game" basketball.

[JRutledge]

The most athletic teams I see in high school are often not waiting to shoot the ball at the time it would take the shot clock to expire. If they are so talented, they take the shots when they can. Nothing requires you to wait until the shot clock is over and many teams even at the college ranks never wait to shoot the ball based on the shot clock. Now that being said I could take it or leave it. I am more concerned about the constant mistakes made with the shot clock. I do not think the game is going to change that much but we have something else to officiate. Otherwise all levels use a shot clock except high school, it is not going to be that big of an adjustment if you ask me for many teams. Of course some will not be able to take good shots, but that was the case anyway.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am more concerned about the constant mistakes made with the shot clock ... we have something else to officiate.

Agree. We use a shot clock with Connecticut boys and girls private prep school varsity games and there's almost always some type of a problem, usually human error.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Agree. We use a shot clock with boys and girls private prep school varsity games and there's almost always some type of a problem, usually human error.

There is a problem at the major college level with the shot clock. Replay usually fixes it and we will not likely have that to correct that situation. But mistakes are common at the small college level. Not all the time but enough it can be annoying at times. We will have to be better officials with the clock for sure. That might be the good thing with this change.

Peace

[SNIPERBBB]

I've liked the idea of the punch or point for the initial signal on any TC/OC call but I like the behind the head for the reporting area. Of course Ohio went with behind the head when the punch was introduced so there's no real change for us.

[JRutledge]

I just noticed something. I thought they said they were getting rid of the "behind the head" signal (I did not go look at the specific number, my bad). So the NF is basically doing the same thing that the NCAA Men's side is doing with the signal. Behind the head but I guess no punch or at least not the punch alone. I was so concerned with the shot clock stuff, I did not pay attention to what they were referencing clearly. So I guess NF and NCAA are going to basically match in this area.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

So I guess NF and NCAA are going to basically match in this area.

Originally Posted by Raymond

NCAA-Women's does not use the same signals for offensive fouls that NCAA-Men's do, so it's not as simple as copying what the NCAA does. Each organization does what they feel like doing.

To each his own (or her own).

[Kansas Ref]

Given the recent emphasis on "aligning" the NF with the (men's) NCAA, a few issues are noteworthy:

1) Three things that should never be emulated between the NF and NCAA level rules/mechanics:
A) the 5-second closely guarded count should be maintained for NF games
B) the NF goal-tending rule should not be changed to the (men's) NCAA rule.
C) the 3 point arc should not be extended.