NFHS Shot Clock Guidelines ...

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Use the shot clock to administer the 10-second backcourt count (9-8).

&

Start the shot clock when:

A player inbounds legally touches or is touched by the ball on a throw-in





==============================

The above does not mesh with the current NFHS rule for ten seconds in the backcourt as a tipped or deflected throw-in pass will cause the shot clock to begin prior to the establishment of control inbounds.

Not the first time the rules editors don't pay attention to the details.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Use the shot clock to administer the 10-second backcourt count (9-8) & Start the shot clock when: A player inbounds legally touches or is touched by the ball on a throw-in. The above does not mesh with the current NFHS rule for ten seconds in the backcourt as a tipped or deflected throw-in pass will cause the shot clock to begin prior to the establishment of control inbounds.

Originally Posted by Raymond

Not the first time the rules editors don't pay attention to the details.

Connecticut private prep schools use a stupid hybrid combination of NCAA and NFHS rules, including a shot clock for varsity games. I noticed the unintended consequence that Nevadaref noted in my prep school games while using the NCAA shot clock to "count" the NFHS 10-second backcourt rule.

Stupid Connecticut private prep school NCAA/NFHS hybrid rules.

Stupid NFHS.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Connecticut private prep schools use a stupid hybrid combination of NCAA and NFHS rules, including a shot clock for varsity games. I noticed the unintended consequence that Nevadaref noted in my prep school games while using the NCAA shot clock to "count" the NFHS 10-second backcourt rule.

Stupid Connecticut private prep school NCAA/NFHS hybrid rules.

Stupid NFHS.

I do not see this as an issue or a hybrid situation. I see this if you use the shot clock then the shot clock takes over for the 10-second violation usage. Why not use the shot clock? Everyone can see it and it also makes it easier to judge. No complaining you were too fast or two long, there is a hard fast gauge to determining the timing of the count. The only issue is it must be started properly but that is the case at the college level too. But not much of an issue.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do not see this as an issue or a hybrid situation. I see this if you use the shot clock then the shot clock takes over for the 10-second violation usage.

But the current NFHS ten second rule doesn't fully allow for that.

It's most likely nit picking but it's also an unintended consequence of combining rule sets without attention to detail.

New NFHS shot clock guidelines say to start the shot clock and to use the shot clock for the ten second count on a "touch".

Current NFHS rules says to start the the ten second count on a "possession".

95-plus % of the time the "touch" and the "possession" will be at exactly the same time.

5-minus % of the time the "touch" and the "possession" won't be the same and the "possession" may trail the "touch" by one, or more, seconds (muff, deflection, etc.).

The NFHS will eventually have to change its "use the shot clock for ten second count" guideline, or change the ten second rule from "possession" to "touch", to align the ten second rule with the new non-visual count (use the shot clock) "mechanic".

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

But the current NFHS ten second rule doesn't fully allow for that.

But you are adding a completely different element into the game. So this is something that is used at levels that use the shot clock. Again, only applies if the shot clock is used. If not, then you do not have anything to worry about.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

It's most likely nit picking but it's also an unintended consequence of combining rule sets without attention to detail.

New NFHS shot clock guidelines say to start the shot clock and to use the shot clock for the ten second count on a "touch".

Current NFHS rules says to start the the ten second count on a "possession".

95-plus % of the time the "touch" and the "possession" will be at exactly the same time.

Again, I am aware of the difference, but if you do not have a shot clock there is no reason to worry about this. Because if you did have a shot clock and the time got to 25 and no violation, you would cause other issues or complaints. So why not put them together if using the shot clock? I think this was very intentional on the part of the NF. You would almost have to create two separate rules in the rulebook for something not used in many cases.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

5-minus % of the time the "touch" and the "possession" won't be the same and the "possession" may trail the "touch" by one, or more, seconds (muff, fumble, deflection, etc.).

The NFHS will eventually have to change its "use the shot clock for ten second count" guideline, or change the ten second rule from "possession" to "touch", to align the ten second rule with the new "mechanic".

No one said it would be the same. But again the NCAA and NBA already do this in their games. The officials do not have a visible count because the clock is the timing device used. That is why the rule also said to give a visible count when the shot clock is turned off or not being used (less than 35 seconds).

I am glad if they are implementing the shot clock, we do the same at all levels in this case.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

So why not put them together if using the shot clock? I think this was very intentional on the part of the NF. You would almost have to create two separate rules in the rulebook for something not used in many cases.

Agree that the shot clock and ten second count should probably be used together (accuracy and similar to other rule sets familiar to many basketball stakeholders).

But if one is going to use the shot clock to "count" ten seconds (as it appears the NFHS want us to do) it's going to require some type of change in the existing ten second rule:

9-8: A player must not be, nor may his/her team be, in continuous control of the ball which is in his/her backcourt for 10 seconds.

4-2: A player is in control of the ball when he/she is holding or dribbling a live ball. A team is in control of the ball: When a player of the team is in control.

With no rule change there is a possibility of this worst case scenario.

State high school championship final game. Shot clock used. Team B 65, Team A 64. Fourth period. Fifteen seconds left in game. Both teams come out of a timeout. Team A, with no timeouts remaining, inbounds in their backcourt. Inbounder A1 passes to A2, who muffs (shot clock legally start on inbounds touch) the ball away, but eventuality, after two seconds pass (with deflections but no control by both teams), secures control of the ball by holding it and the begins to dribble. Facing strong defensive pressure in his backcourt, A2 is still in his backcourt when the shot clock is at 25 seconds (game clock at five seconds) and the trail official calls a ten second violation on Team A. Team A head coach politely argues that Team A only had "control" of the ball for approximately eight seconds (proven after game on videotape) in the backcourt, quoting 9-8 and 4-2, and should not have had the ten second violation called, depriving Team A of a chance to win the game.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Agree that the shot clock and ten second count should probably be used together (accuracy and similar to other rule sets familiar to many basketball stakeholders).

But if one is going to use the shot clock to "count" ten seconds (as it appears the NFHS want us to do) it's going to require some type of change in the existing ten second rule:

9-8: A player must not be, nor may his/her team be, in continuous control of the ball which is in his/her backcourt for 10 seconds.

4-2: A player is in control of the ball when he/she is holding or dribbling a live ball. A team is in control of the ball: When a player of the team is in control.

With no rule change there is a possibility of this worst case scenario.

State high school championship final game. Shot clock used. Team B 65, Team A 64. Fourth period. Fifteen seconds left in game. Both teams come out of a timeout. Team A, with no timeouts remaining, inbounds in their backcourt. Inbounder A1 passes to A2, who fumbles (game clock and shot clock legally start) the ball away, but eventuality, after two seconds pass, secures control of the ball by holding it and the begins to dribble. Facing strong defensive pressure in his backcourt, A2 is still in his backcourt when the shot clock is at 25 seconds (game clock at five seconds) and the trail official calls a ten second violation on Team A. Team A head coach politely argues that Team A only had "control" of the ball for eight seconds in the backcourt, quoting 9-8 and 4-2, and should not have had the ten second violation called, depriving Team A of a chance to win the game.

You could solve all this with case plays or interpretations that deal with the issue. But I do not see why it matters if using the shot clock the rule says how to apply that rule and if you do not use the rule, everything stays the same? Not sure it matters at that point, that is all I am saying. And honestly, I do not see the NF making a rule for the shot clock (in the violations section) and then another rule in that same section for situations without a shot clock.

Then again, very aware of the difference and do not think it would be that hard if you are in a state that uses the shot clock. I think this would not be that hard for most of us either way.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

State high school championship final game. Shot clock used. Team B 65, Team A 64. Fourth period. Fifteen seconds left in game. Both teams come out of a timeout. Team A, with no timeouts remaining, inbounds in their backcourt. Inbounder A1 passes to A2, who fumbles (game clock and shot clock legally start on inbounds touch) the ball away, but eventuality, after two seconds pass (with deflections but no control by both teams), secures control of the ball by holding it and the begins to dribble. Facing strong defensive pressure in his backcourt, A2 is still in his backcourt when the shot clock is at 25 seconds (game clock at five seconds) and the trail official calls a ten second violation on Team A. Team A head coach politely argues that Team A only had "control" of the ball for approximately eight seconds (proven after game on videotape) in the backcourt, quoting 9-8 and 4-2, and should not have had the ten second violation called, depriving Team A of a chance to win the game.

A two second time difference shouldn't be just passed off as, "Sorry Coach, this is a shot clock game". The ten second rule with the language "in continuous control of the ball which is in his/her backcourt for 10 seconds" is a fundamental basketball rule that hasn't changed in over forty years. It should take more than just a one sentence guideline, "Use the shot clock to administer the 10-second backcourt count (9-8)" (that includes the actual unchanged existing rule citation) to overturn such a fundamental rule. It's an oversight with an unintended consequence, it has to be. Luckily, there are a few different ways to correct it. The NFHS tried to fit a round NCAA peg into a square NFHS hole, with little attention to detail (even JRutledge said that the language was very similar, I say maybe copied, with no regard for differing details and unintended consequences).