Biggest rules/mechanics changes of the last 5 years

[ilyazhito]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Some high school gyms still have the 28 foot hash mark painted on the inbounds side of the boundary sideline.

Anybody besides Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. old enough to remember what this hash mark was originally used for?

Back in the day, teams had an option to forgo free throws on a foul against them. The 28-foot mark was used as the throw-in location in that case.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Some high school gyms still have the 28 foot hash mark painted on the inbounds side of the boundary sideline. Anybody besides Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. old enough to remember what this hash mark was originally used for?

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

Back in the day, teams had an option to forgo free throws on a foul against them. The 28-foot mark was used as the throw-in location in that case.

No ilyazhito, but thanks for playing. As a parting gift you'll receive a twenty-volume set of the Encyclopedia International, a case of Turtle Wax, and a year's supply of Rice-A-Roni, the San Francisco treat.

Two uses for NFHS 28 foot hash marks back in ancient times.

1) Hash mark separated the midcourt for the forecourt. New five second closely guarded dribbling count if dribbler passed the hash mark going forward. So a possibility of sixteen seconds of being closely guarded with no violation. Holding in midcourt. Dribbling in midcourt. Continue dribbling past hash mark. Continue dribbling in forecourt. Holding in forecourt.

2) Lack of action technical foul. Team behind, while on offense, had to "force the action" by dribbling past the hash mark after being warned by the officials. Team behind, while on defense, had to "force the action" by closely guarding opponents in the midcourt after being warned by the officials.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by fiasco

Getting back into officiating after almost a 10 year hiatus.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

On my local board, after a ten year absence, such an official would be strongly encouraged to take the rule classes and mechanics classes and be required to take the written test and the floor test like a rookie official.

It was just announced today that our local board is down to 233 members compared to 271 last year. Before COVID we were up around 320 members, reaching our maximum numbers during the Great Recession between 2007 and 2009.

Not coincidentally, the board just came out with a new Former Member Reinstatement Policy having the rationale to provide guidelines for former certified members to return as a member without having to retake the rules class/exam and floor class/test.

Desperate times, desperate measures.

It's so bad with Connecticut football officials that varsity games are being played on both Friday nights and Thursday nights to insure the availability of enough officials for the games.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

Back in the day, teams had an option to forgo free throws on a foul against them. The 28-foot mark was used as the throw-in location in that case.

That may have been a FIBA rule in the past.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

It was just announced that our local board is down to 233 members compared to 271 last year. Before COVID we were up around 320 members, reaching our maximum numbers during the Great Recession between 2007 and 2009.

My local board covers approximately 75 public and private high schools. Boys. Girls. Varsity. Junior varsity. Freshmen. Any many boys and girls middle school programs.

It's gonna be a busy season.

I predict lots of doubleheaders for officials (which, over forty-plus years, has not been the norm for my local board).

Note: Connecticut game fees for 2022-2023 season: Varsity fee: $103.41; Subvarsity fee (junior varsity, freshmen, middle school): $67.11.

[ilyazhito]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

My local board covers approximately 75 public and private high schools. Boys. Girls. Varsity. Junior varsity. Freshmen. Any many boys and girls middle school programs.

It's gonna be a busy season.

I predict lots of doubleheaders for officials (which, over forty-plus years, has not been the norm for my local board).

Note: Connecticut game fees for 2022-2023 season: Varsity fee: $103.41; Subvarsity fee (junior varsity, freshmen, middle school): $67.11.

If 3 officials becomes a thing, then the 2 officials doing the JV game could either be joined by a fresh official, or someone who worked a middle school game earlier (or is coming from another game).

In DC, the schedule often has JV-girls varsity-boys varsity. In that case, a JV official could stay for the girls varsity game. The other two officials show up for the girls varsity game. Then, the other JV official works the boys game with the 2 from the girls varsity game.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I predict lots of doubleheaders for officials (which, over forty-plus years, has not been the norm for my local board).

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

If 3 officials becomes a thing, then the 2 officials doing the JV game could either be joined by a fresh official, or someone who worked a middle school game earlier (or is coming from another game).

Here in official-deficient Connecticut, the push (more of a slight nudge) to go to three officials will probably take a (hopefully temporary) back seat to just getting two officials assigned to games.

Keep in mind that in my little corner of Connecticut we never "mix up" genders on the same afternoon/night, at the same site, it's either all boys, or all girls, typically freshmen (4:00 p.m.), junior varsity (5:30 p.m.), and varsity (7:00 p.m.). While the school's boys team may be at home, the girls team may be on the road, or vice versa.

Recent doubleheader assignments, locally rare before our numbers starting dropping a few years ago, are usually of two types.

One type of doubleheader assignment is for the same two officials to work both the freshmen and junior varsity games, with two "fresh" officials working the varsity game.

Another is for the same two officials to work both the junior varsity and varsity game while a different crew worked the earlier freshmen game.

Last season, between low numbers to begin with, officials opting out due to COVID, illness (COVID, influenza, etc.), injuries, and makeup games due snow, we had a few guys working tripleheaders (freshmen, junior varsity, varsity), both physically and mentally demanding, not a desirable situation, but a nice payday ($230).

Things got so bad last season that our assigner had to tell many schools that he couldn't assign "snow" makeup games on certain dates and that they had to come up with alternate dates. He had to tell two very large city school systems, with several middle schools each, that he could not assign any officials to their middle school games until late February and March, after other school systems middle school game schedules had completed.

[ilyazhito]

With 3 games, it's even easier, at least from a numbers perspective. Assuming JV/varsity are done by the same two people, one freshman official can stay for varsity to make the crew of 3. If there are freshman/JV doubleheaders, then we would need 3 distinct officials for the varsity game.

Either way, a shot clock in CT is good news, and a sign that the CIAC is adapting. Hopefully 3-person will become more common in other parts of IAABO-land (PSAL now does 3-person for its AA (largest school) games). CT is now less out of step with MA and NY.

On a different note, do CT officials cross the state border to work in MA or NY? Border crossing is VERY common in the DC area.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

On a different note, do CT officials cross the state border to work in MA or NY? Border crossing is VERY common in the DC area.

In order to cross a border between IAABO local boards in Connecticut, one has to become a "dual member" (I'm not sure how that works dues-wise). Usual reason is one lives in one local board but works in another local board. A few live in one local board, but usually only belong to that board in "name" only, and only accept game assignments from the board that they work in. We have a gal who belongs to three local boards, and accepts game assignments from three local boards.

Since the adjoining states of New York, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island, are all IAABO states, I'm sure that one can cross a state border if one wants to ("dual member"). Even if adjoining states were not IAABO, I don't know what would stop somebody from belonging to and accepting game assignments from a Connecticut local IAABO board and also belonging to and accepting game assignments from another state's non-IAABO local board.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

...
Since the adjoining states of New York, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island, are all IAABO states, I'm sure that one can cross a state border if one wants to. Even if adjoining states were not IAABO, I don't know what would stop somebody from belonging to and accepting game assignments from a Connecticut local IAABO board and also belonging to and accepting game assignments from another state's non-IAABO local board.

Nothing, at least ethically. We have plenty of folks in my area and along the NC/Virginia border who belong to HS associations in both states. Most of the HS associations in VA are IAABO certified. I don't know about NC.

I'm sure there are some commissioners who threaten/strong-arm/intimidate members not to do such.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

We have plenty of folks in my area and along the NC/Virginia border who belong to HS associations in both states. Most of the HS associations in VA are IAABO certified. I don't know about NC.

North Carolina appears not to be an IAABO state.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

There are local IAABO boards in Colorado, Connecticut, New York, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Vermont, New Hampshire, Virginia, South Carolina, Rhode Island, Arizona, Delaware, Alaska, California, Georgia, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, Washington, District of Columbia, British Columbia, Ontario, Guam, Japan, and Korea.

Originally Posted by Raymond

I'm sure there are some commissioners who threaten/strong-arm/intimidate members not to do such.

Agree.

We had a recent battle between two local Connecticut IAABO assignment commissioners over an official who worked games in two local IAABO boards without going through any official dual member process (paperwork, dues).

With the official shortage we have here in Connecticut, assignment commissioners don't seem to have the "power" they used to have just a few years ago.

Oh, they still have power, they're just missing a few teeth.

Years ago assignment commissioners could "piss off" anybody they wanted to, there was always a long line of officials ready to step in and be assigned more games.

Now, if an assignment commissioner "pisses off" just a few guys, who decide to block out extra days on Arbiter (or worse, quit) it will be very difficult to fill black shoes and cover all games.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

For those without a scorecard:

1970-71: Hit.
1981: Release.
1993: Hit.
1996-97: Release.
1997-98: Hit.
2014-15: Release.

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.: What was going on before 1970? Hit the peach basket?

My library starts with the 1971-72 school year but my playing career started in seventh grade (1963-64) and the NBC Rules were on the "hit" and the first change to the Rules was not the 1970-71 school year. The first change from "hit" to "release" was made for the 1980-81 school year by both the NFHS and NCAA Men's Basketball Rules Committees.

Since the 1980-81 school year the NCAA Men's Basketball Rules Committee has kept the Rule as on the "release", while the NFHS has been on a (Foucault, ) pendulum ever since.

As far as the women's college basketball rules are concerned: The NAGWS Basketball Rules were on the "hit" until the NCAA took over from the AIAW and formed its own Women's Basketball Rules Committee for the 1983-84 school year, and made the change from "hit" to "release" and has stayed the same as the Men's Basketball Rules ever since.

Interesting side note about the women's rules. The AIAW and the NCAA held competing national championships for the 1981-82 school year which the last AIAW Championship and was the first NCAA Championship, and the NCAA used the NAGWS Rules for 1982-83 Championship.

MTD, Sr.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

1970-71: Hit.
1981: Release.
1993: Hit.
1996-97: Release.
1997-98: Hit.
2014-15: Release.

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

My library starts with the 1971-72 school year but my playing career started in seventh grade (1963-64) and the NBC Rules were on the "hit" and the first change to the Rules was not the 1970-71 school year. The first change from "hit" to "release" was made for the 1980-81 school year by both the NFHS and NCAA Men's Basketball Rules Committees.

I didn't mean to imply that there was a "change" in 1970-71, I just meant that the NFHS was using "hit" in 1970-71. That's the furthest back that I could confirm.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

My library starts with the 1971-72 school year but my playing career started in seventh grade (1963-64) and the NBC Rules were on the "hit" ... The first change from "hit" to "release" was made for the 1980-81 school year by both the NFHS and NCAA Men's Basketball Rules Committees.

So are you saying that "hit" was used as far back as 1963-64 and didn't change to "release" until 1980-81?

I didn't start playing organized basketball until ninth grade (1966-67) and I honestly can't remember if we used "hit" or "release" back then.

Only thing that I do remember for sure it that when I started playing organized basketball, unlike Mark T. DeNucci, Sr., we didn't shoot at peach baskets.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

while the NFHS has been on a Foucault pendulum ever since.

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.: Was the change to "hit" in 1992-93, or 1993-94? My research only confirmed 1993.