High school rule: player entitled to his space on the floor

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by tnolan

Would this then include "prone player foul" on a shot or rebound?

During A1's missed attempt, B3 falls to the ground during rebounding action. A1 gathers the rebound and goes up for the shot again, coming back down and falling over B3 who is still on the ground and not legal. No foul?

JRut video from 2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1KESGhlwUo

So is Green #22 entitled to that spot and this is incidental contact?

Not a foul. B3's position, while not LGP, is a legal position....the two are not the same thing.

The NFHS has clearly said that all cases remain valid even after removal from the book unless stated otherwise. The removal of cases without comment is only due to space limitations and not because the case is invalid. Any cases that are to be changed will have a new case indicating the change.

[BillyMac]

... That's why they call me second hand Rose (Barbra Streisand, 1965)

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The NFHS has clearly said that all cases remain valid even after removal from the book unless stated otherwise. The removal of cases without comment is only due to space limitations and not because the case is invalid. Any cases that are to be changed will have a new case indicating the change.

Camron Rust: I believe you and agree with you. I only know of this "third hand", from Lindsey Atkinson, the NFHS basketball rules editor, to one of the IAABO Co-Coordinators of Interpreters, to me.

What's the origin of your statement?

https://forum.officiating.com/basket...ml#post1044943

Originally Posted by Raymond

"BillyMac on social media said that Lindsay Atkinson said...."

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

... That's why they call me second hand Rose (Barbra Streisand, 1965)



Camron Rust: I believe you and agree with you. I only know of this "third hand", from Lindsey Atkinson, the NFHS basketball rules editor, to one of the IAABO Co-Coordinators of Interpreters, to me.

What's the origin of your statement?

https://forum.officiating.com/basket...ml#post1044943

The origin of my statement was the NFHS Rules Interpreters Meeting in which it was said.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The origin of my statement was the NFHS Rules Interpreters Meeting in which it was said.

Matches Lindsey Atkinson's (NFHS basketball rules editor) statement that I heard via the IAABO Co-Coordinators of Interpreters at the IAABO 2021 Fall Seminar (with over 200 local, or state, IAABO interpreters participating).

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The NFHS has clearly said that all cases remain valid even after removal from the book unless stated otherwise. The removal of cases without comment is only due to space limitations and not because the case is invalid. Any cases that are to be changed will have a new case indicating the change.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

The following was just announced this weekend at the IAABO Fall Seminar ... To prepare for the IAABO Fall Seminar, the four IAABO Co-Coordinators of Interpreters, one of whom has served on the most recent NFHS Basketball Rules Committee, and who will continue to serve on the committee, met with Lindsey Atkinson, the new NFHS rules editor for basketball, on September 23, 2021 ... Ms. Atkinson stated that as long as there are no relevant rule changes, or interpretation changes, to invalidate such, old vanished interpretations are still officially considered to be valid by the NFHS. She also stated that usual reason for still valid casebook plays to be dropped is due to page limitations, when a new caseplay goes in, one usually has to come out.

Lindsey Atkinson's statement needs a wider audience to gain any traction.

Her getting in the ear of only several dozen officials isn't very helpful.