2023-2024 Rules Changes Announced.

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

Can't find where it says it explicitly but it's pretty much assumed that we go to POI after a TO.

Well in NCAA-M (not sure about W) if a timeout is called during a live ball in the frontcourt you go to the nearest of the four spots. If it's called during a dead ball you stay at the spot where the ball would have been put in play absent the timeout (so if it went out of bounds in the corner, the throw-in will be there regardless of the timeout).

This is what I'm saying NFHS will need to clarify.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SC Official

Well in NCAA-M (not sure about W) if a timeout is called during a live ball in the frontcourt you go to the nearest of the four spots. If it's called during a dead ball you stay at the spot where the ball would have been put in play absent the timeout (so if it went out of bounds in the corner, the throw-in will be there regardless of the timeout).

This is what I'm saying NFHS will need to clarify.

They need to clarify the out of bounds situation, but I guess that will come when they change the wording of this rule and other rules as to what to do.

When the ball is in team control in the offensive team’s frontcourt and the defensive team commits a violation, a common foul prior to the bonus, or the ball becomes dead, the corresponding throw-in by the offensive team will be at one of four designated spots determined by where the infraction took place.

I am going to assume that when a timeout takes place, that highlighted point would be a part of the application stated. And again, only applying to the FC. We would do the very same we did before in the BC. And that means the ball is not advanced to a spot either.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I see almost no situation where this reduces fouls

There was always a chance for rebounding fouls on the front end of a one and one.

Now, with two free throws, the players just stand there on the first free throw thinking about taking their steady girl to the malt shop after the game.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... it eliminates the debate of where the ball goes in almost every situation.

Forty-plus years and I've never had a debate about this.

Closest spot to foul, violation, out of bounds, or point of interruption.

No big deal.

Easy peasy lemon squeezy.

Plus, during a timeout, one of us always stands with the ball where we will inbound, so if the coach asks, we just point.

In the rare situation where officials need to get together during a timeout for a tête-à-tête, we leave the ball at the throwin spot.

Yeah, I know that some frown at that, but we've never had a ball stolen.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Pretty much the rule before.

Really, in the past you wouldn't allow players on a team to play with two different color shorts? Citation please?

3-4-1: Team jersey color and design must adhere to the following:
a. The torso of the team jersey must be the same single solid color for all team members.
c. The torso color must be white for the home team and a contrasting dark color for the visiting team.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

This is a great change, because there were schools that had colors like orange or yellow or purple and they had a hard time matching the color with multiple players. Why not just allow black to be worn as black is one of the easiest colors to find.

Agree.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Regarding the change allowing visitor black, while I always prefer "Fashion Police" issues to change from complex to simpler, I don't mind this change because most of our local officials already allowed black for purple and for dark blue. Ever try to go down to your local Walmart and buy a purple T-shirt?

I figured that this was the "purple rule". I had forgotten about orange (that many of us refer to as "red"), or yellow.

Back in my middle school teaching days, I was in charge of basketball intramurals.

Players had to wear T-shirts (not provided by the school) that matched the color (T-shirts could have images, logos, lettering, etc.) of team that they were assigned to.

Sometimes we had as many as eight teams.

Some T-shirt colors were a lot easier to find than other T-shirt colors.

White, red, green, gray, black, and blue were usually easy.

Orange, yellow, and purple were often not so easy.

Sometimes we would have a dark blue team and light blue team (light blue was often easier to find than purple, yellow, or orange).

Sometimes, if low numbers allowed, we would allow players on one team to wear either yellow or orange, close enough, same part of the spectrum.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... it eliminates the debate of where the ball goes in almost every situation.

Biggest problem we have are guys that think that all backcourt violations always get a throwin spot at exactly the division line, and that throwins for three second violations go to the point of interruption (sometimes a dribbler at the point, or wing, position).

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

There was always a chance for rebounding fouls on the front end of a one and one.

Now, with two free throws, the players just stand there on the first free throw thinking about taking their steady girl to the malt shop after the game.

Stop taking everything someone says so literally. Obviously, a rebound takes place on a miss. When they make the FT, that situation often does not exist, on a FT because of the restrictions. So again, you do not have most rebounding situations if they make the FT which was the point of my post.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

There was always a chance for rebounding fouls on the front end of a one and one.

Now, with two free throws, the players just stand there on the first free throw thinking about taking their steady girl to the malt shop after the game.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Forty-plus years and I've never had a debate about this.

Closest spot to foul, violation, out of bounds, or point of interruption.

No big deal.

Easy peasy lemon squeezy.

Plus, during a timeout, one of us always stands with the ball where we will inbound, so if the coach asks, we just point.

In the rare situation where officials need to get together during a timeout for a tête-à-tête, we leave the ball at the throwin spot.

Yeah, I know that some frown at that, but we've never had a ball stolen.

Well in 27 years I have had many. Where a player wants to take it at a totally different spot than where the violation took place or the official does not give you the spot. Now that basically is over because the 4 spots are clear. And yes during timeouts coaches assume where the spot should be a lot (even in the BC). This only applies to the FC so some of that is alleviated.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Really, in the past you wouldn't allow players on a team to play with two different color shorts? Citation please?

3-4-1: Team jersey color and design must adhere to the following:
a. The torso of the team jersey must be the same single solid color for all team members.
c. The torso color must be white for the home team and a contrasting dark color for the visiting team.

Did the application of the rule change? No. Nothing to site. Stop being obtuse.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Obviously, a rebound takes place on a miss.

Rebounding "action" also took place on the front end of a one and one even if the free throw was ultimately successful.

With the old one and one rule, on the front end of a one and one, even if the free throw was ultimately successful, rebounders would still be jockeying for position.

Sure a foul would be most likely rebounding an actual miss, but fouls did occur occasionally on the front end of a one and one on free throws that may have been ultimately successful.

That's why we had to intently watch for such fouls.

Quoth the raven, "Nevermore".

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Did the application of the rule change? No.

Absolutely 100% disagree.

Old rule: No color restrictions for shorts. Players on the same team can legally have multiple color shorts, one blue, another white, etc. No officials having a "Fashion Police" role in regard to the color of snorts.

New rule: Color restrictions for shorts in that players on the same team most all wear the same color shorts. It's illegal for players on the same team to have multiple color shorts, one blue, another white, etc. In regard to shorts, officials now have a "Fashion Police" role: "Coach. All your players must wear the same color shorts. Pick a color, those kids can play tonight".

I'm divided on this rule change.

While I agree that rules that restrict equipment colors benefit officials by allowing them to easily identify players on each team during fast paced action, I also always prefer "Fashion Police" issues to change from complex to simpler.

Unfortunately (or fortunately) fashion issues changed from simpler to more complex (shorts, visitor black undershirts) this coming year.

Two more fashion issues to deal with that we didn't have to deal with last year.

One (shorts) that allows us to easily identify players on each team during fast paced action, and another (visitor black undershirts) that was changed only for the convenience of teams/players/parents.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Did the application of the rule change? No.

If by this you mean that you've never encountered multiple color shorts in any of your high school varsity games, then I see your point that this rule change would not apply to you.

However it does apply to my little corner of Connecticut.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

... we have several teams in our local area where junior varsity shorts are different colors than varsity shorts (a kind of rite of passage). Coaches will often reward junior varsity players by inviting some of them (with their "wrong" color shorts) to sit on the varsity bench. Pretty sure that our CIAC will have to make some exceptions until everybody goes through a new uniform cycle (or maybe beyond).

[JRutledge]

New Rule says:

Rule 3-4-5 clarifies that multiple styles of uniform bottoms may be worn by teammates, but they must all be like-colored and adhere to uniform rules outlined in Rule 3-6-2 regarding logos and trademarks.

Old Rule says:

Uniform pants/skirts shall have only one visible logo manufacturer's logo/trademark/reference...........Showing multiple logos on the waistband of the pants/skirts makes them illegal.

The only thing illegal before was the kind of logo you had on. I hardly see a change unless "like color" is meant to mean same color. So that means to me what we did before, we did not nitpick what they wore. And it also does not say the same solid color either.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I hardly see a change unless "like color" is meant to mean same color.

I believe that's what it means, "like color" means the same (or similar) color, but, of course I can be misreading it. We'll have to wait for the actual rule language or interpretations to see what the NFHS actually expects.

3-4-5: Requires uniform bottoms on teammates to be like-colored while allowing different styles of uniform bottoms among teammates. Rationale: Clarifies that teammates must all wear like-colored uniform bottoms but may wear multiple styles while aligning language with other NFHS rules codes.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

... we have several teams in our local area where junior varsity shorts are different colors than varsity shorts (a kind of rite of passage). Coaches will often reward junior varsity players by inviting some of them (with their "wrong" color shorts) to sit on the varsity bench. Pretty sure that our CIAC will have to make some exceptions until everybody goes through a new uniform cycle (or maybe beyond).

In my case, the colors aren't even close. Junior varsity players wear white shorts. Varsity players on the same team wear dark shorts, for example, some teams blue, some teams red, some teams black. Or vice versa (as well as home versus road). It's when some junior varsity players also try to play in the later varsity game (without changing shorts) where we could have some problems with the new rule, if I'm reading it correctly.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I've always been very pleased that the NFHS didn't have any color restrictions on shorts, shoes, and socks. Quoth the raven, "Nevermore".