2022-23 NFHS Shot Clock Guidelines State Association Adoption ...

[BillyMac]

Just spotted this on the NFHS basketball website, it may have been there since August 4, 2022.

2022-23 NFHS Shot Clock Guidelines State Association Adoption

Use the shot clock to administer the 10-second backcourt count (9-8). The 10-second count shall begin when the ball touches, or is legally touched by, a player on the court, in the backcourt on a throw-in or on player control on a rebound or jump ball.

The NFHS still hasn’t reconciled the shot clock guideline with the actual 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.

It’s one thing for the NFHS to leave the reconciliation up to individual states, but to just ignore the disconnect and not even broach it is very disappointing.

[JRutledge]

If it is a state-adopted rule, then what needs to be reconciled? You only have to worry about it if your state says they are using it. At this moment, neither of my states have even said they would use the shot clock.

This is listed for the shot clock if adopted. If you are not using the shot clock there is nothing to worry about.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

If it is a state-adopted rule, then what needs to be reconciled? You only have to worry about it if your state says they are using it.

I understand JRutledge's view to allow all of this to be an individual state decision.

But it would be nice if the NFHS could broach the disconnect for what "should" or "could" happen within each shot clock adopting state regarding:

- subvarsity (junior varsity, freshman, middle school) games where a shot clock may not be used by state decision.

- games where a shot clock is supposed to be used but, due to a malfunction, doesn't work, and isn't used for an entire game.

- less than 35 seconds left in the period in a shot clock game when shot clock is turned off.

The NFHS gives us this:

The official shall use a silent, visible 10 second count when there is no shot clock visible.

High school basketball would be best served nationally if the NFHS would either change the ten second rule, or the shot clock guideline, so that they "match", pick either touch, or control, and make it a consistent law of the land for both shot clock games and non-shot clock games, interlevel, intrastate, or interstate.

I believe that the NCAA has done this, going with touch. Why not the same in high school?

At absolute minimum, the NFHS should publicly recognize that that a disconnect does exist and that states that adopt a shot clock need to decide for themselves what they want to do regarding the three situations above.

[BillyMac]

2022-23 NFHS Shot Clock Guidelines State Association Adoption

https://www.nfhs.org/media/5989150/2...guidelines.pdf

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I understand JRutledge's view to allow all of this to be an individual state decision.

But it would be nice if the NFHS could broach the disconnect for what "should" or "could" happen within each shot clock adopting state regarding:

- subvarsity (junior varsity, freshman, middle school) games where a shot clock may not be used by state decision.

- games where a shot clock is supposed to be used but, due to a malfunction, doesn't work, and isn't used for an entire game.

- less than 35 seconds left in the period in a shot clock game when shot clock is turned off.

The NFHS gives us this:

The official shall use a silent, visible 10 second count when there is no shot clock visible.

High school basketball would be best served nationally if the NFHS would either change the ten second rule, or the shot clock guideline, so that they "match", pick either touch, or control, and make it a consistent law of the land for both shot clock games and non-shot clock games, interlevel, intrastate, or interstate.

I believe that the NCAA has done this, going with touch. Why not the same in high school?

At absolute minimum, the NFHS should publicly recognize that that a disconnect does exist and that states that adopt a shot clock need to decide for themselves what they want to do regarding the three situations above.

In every shot clock game that had a malfunction with the shot clock (and extremely rare), we did not play without the issue being resolved. So I would doubt it would be any different than if the clock went out and could not be restored, you might not play the game anymore. Those things just do not "go out." So your concern to me is kind of overreaching if you think that is going to be a common occurrence. Not trying to disagree with you that more information would be nice, but since this is only about what happens with a shot clock not seeing the big deal right now. Most people will only work in one state where they have a shot clock or they will not in other cases. And if that is such an issue, your state representatives can make that clear.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Not trying to disagree with you that more information would be nice, but since this is only about what happens with a shot clock not seeing the big deal right now. Most people will only work in one state where they have a shot clock or they will not in other cases. And if that is such an issue, your state representatives can make that clear.

Like JRutledge, I would also like "more information" from the NFHS, but it's been two years and "not a peep", so I'm not "holding my breath".

I only hope that individual state "representatives" figure out in advance that there's a disconnect and address it themselves.

For example an individual shot clock state may decide to go with "touch" in varsity games with a shot clock, but go with "control" for a freshman or middle school games where the state decides not to use shot clocks.

Another individual shot clock state may decide to go with "touch" for all games, at all levels, with, or without shot clocks.

Of course the states that don't use any shot clocks will still have to go with "control".

Stupid NFHS.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I only hope that individual state "representatives" figure out in advance that there's a disconnect and address it themselves.

My lack of confidence in individual states to "handle" things is due to what's been going on here in Connecticut.

Connecticut public and Catholic schools all use 100% NFHS rules, with no shot clocks.

Connecticut private prep schools use a wacky hybrid version of NFHS and NCAA rules, including a shot clock (and other rules), and we're advised (recently) to use the shot clock for the ten second count (no visible count), but we use the NFHS ten second rule (control).

How can we use the ten second rule shot clock "mechanics" if we don't use the NCAA ten second rule (touch)?

I have yet to have anyone in authority, from the officials side, or the prep school side, answer that question.

I've had private prep schools shot clock timekeepers start the shot clock during the dead ball period after a basket, probably instructed to so by their coach or athletic director. Shows how little private prep school coaches and athletics directors care about shot clock rules.

I've had fans and coaches yell "ten seconds" based on only the shot clock, not understanding the rule differences.

Nobody cares, and nobody will care care until the rule disconnect creates a controversy at the end of an important game. Hasn't happened yet, but only for the grace of God.

Instead of being proactive, were going to be reactive. Not a good place to be.

And that's why I'm such a big worrier, worrywart, and fuss-budget about this topic.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Like JRutledge, I would also like "more information" from the NFHS, but it's been two years and "not a peep", so I'm not "holding my breath".

I only hope that individual state "representatives" figure out in advance that there's a disconnect and address it themselves.

For example an individual shot clock state may decide to go with "touch" in varsity games with a shot clock, but go with "control" for a freshman or middle school games where the state decides not to use shot clocks.

Another individual shot clock state may decide to go with "touch" for all games, at all levels, with, or without shot clocks.

Of course the states that don't use any shot clocks will still have to go with "control".

Stupid NFHS.

They said what the rule was for the shot clock application. If you do not have a shot clock, you use the rule that is already stated in the book. KISS!!!!

Peace

[ilyazhito]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Just spotted this on the NFHS basketball website, it may have been there since August 4, 2022.

2022-23 NFHS Shot Clock Guidelines State Association Adoption

Use the shot clock to administer the 10-second backcourt count (9-8). The 10-second count shall begin when the ball touches, or is legally touched by, a player on the court, in the backcourt on a throw-in or on player control on a rebound or jump ball.

The NFHS still hasn’t reconciled the shot clock guideline with the actual 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.

It’s one thing for the NFHS to leave the reconciliation up to individual states, but to just ignore the disconnect and not even broach it is very disappointing.

NCAA rules (men's and women's) interpret team control in this situation as beginning with the throw-in, so a touch inbounds by either team does not change team control. The legal touch inbounds is important because it starts the game (if previously stopped) and shot clocks.

I agree, but then NFHS editing is not the best. They constantly screw up on rules tests by making questions with no correct answer, or else the wrong answer marked as correct, and the rulebooks often feature editorial errors. This is not surprising.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

I agree, but then NFHS editing is not the best. They constantly screw up on rules tests by making questions with no correct answer, or else the wrong answer marked as correct, and the rulebooks often feature editorial errors. This is not surprising.

I generally don't find that to be the case. More often, I find that officials that think there is no correct answer don't understand the underlying rules.

[ilyazhito]

I have seen people get points back on rules tests because questions were badly written. The explanation was usually that the wrong answer was marked as "correct" on the test, but there was at least one occasion on a football test where a question had no correct answer.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I generally don't find that to be the case. More often, I find that officials that think there is no correct answer don't understand the underlying rules.

When we took the NF tests, there were constant mistakes or thrown out questions every year. Usually, they used wording that did not mesh with the rule or it was confusing. Even now one of my states gives out the NF test and there are 2 or three questions thrown out because of the way they worded the question.

And do not get me started on rules changes where often there is no consideration to other rules that affect the change. We had a football rules interpreter that would say famously, "It takes the NF 3 years to get a rule right." He was often right because they would forget the ramifications of a change without seemingly catching a simple change that influenced other languages in the rules. Just like when they went to team control fouls and did not clear up the language for how that influenced backcourt in a better way. And it was the case in other sports like the Horsecollar rule and I remember in baseball the Force Play Slide Rule took a few years to get "right."

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... rules changes where often there is no consideration to other rules that affect the change ... "It takes the NF 3 years to get a rule right." ... they would forget the ramifications of a change without seemingly catching a simple change that influenced other languages in the rules ...

Bingo.

I've "officially" suggested a few rule changes to the NFHS. The NFHS always wants to know the impact of the change on other rules, as well as casebook plays, but often these "impacts" slip through the process.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Bingo.

I've "officially" suggested a few rule changes to the NFHS. The NFHS always wants to know the impact of the change on other rules, as well as casebook plays, but often these "impacts" slip through the process.

I do not see this as an impact that you are talking about. This is rather minor if you ask me. If you are not using a shot clock, nothing changes. If you use a shot clock, there are likely to be procedures to handle those. I do not see the big deal. I really do not.

Other situation, sure.

Peace