2023-2024 Rules Changes Announced.

[BillyMac]

These shorts are not exactly the same color.

Some are white shorts with red stripes, while others are red shorts with white stripes.

[ilyazhito]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Thanks JRutledge.

2023-24 NFHS Basketball Rule Changes

2-1-3 Note (New): Requires the shot clock operator to sit at the scorer’s and timer’s table, if using a shot clock. Rationale: Establishes the placement of the shot clock operator for those states utilizing the shot clock and the growing use of video boards that allow tablet control from anywhere in the gym.

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.

3-5-6: Allows undershirts worn under visiting team jerseys to be black or a single solid color similar to the torso of the jersey. All teammates wearing undershirts must wear the same solid color. Rationale: Allows schools with hard-to-find colors to wear black under visiting team jerseys while continuing to require all team members to match.

4-8-1: Eliminates the one-and-one for common fouls beginning with the seventh team foul in the half and establishes the bonus as two free throws awarded for a common foul beginning with the team’s fifth foul in each quarter and resets the fouls at the end of each quarter. Rationale: Improves flow by providing an opportunity for teams to adjust their play by not carrying over fouls from quarters 1 and 3 to quarters 2 and 4 while significantly reducing the opportunity for correctable errors to occur. Minimizes risk of injury by eliminating the one-and-one and reducing opportunities for rough play during rebounding opportunities.

7-5-2 thru 5: Establishes four throw-in spots (the nearest 28-feet mark along each sideline or the nearest spot 3-feet outside the lane line on the end line) 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 one exception is when the defensive team causes a ball to be out of bounds, the throw-in shall be the spot where the ball went out of bounds. Rationale: Simplifies throw-in procedure when there is team control in the frontcourt and the defensive team commits a violation.

7-6-6: Allows the official administering a throw-in to the wrong team to correct the mistake before the first dead ball after the ball becomes live unless there is a change of possession. Rationale: Allows for a correction of an official's mistake in a more reasonable timeframe.

9-3-3: Establishes that a player may step out of bounds without penalty unless they are the first player to touch the ball after returning to the court or if they left the court to avoid a violation. Rationale: Allows a player to step out of bounds if they gain no advantage and penalizes a team only if they gain an advantage by leaving the court and returning to avoid a violation or to be the first to touch the ball.

2023-24 Basketball Points of Emphasis

Uniforms, Equipment and Apparel
Bench Decorum
Throw-Ins – Proper Locations

I like the changes. Eliminating one and one simplifies foul administration (count to 5 fouls in the quarter, then shoot 2 for every common foul). Establishing 4 spots for throw-ins on common fouls before the bonus and on violations (minus out of bounds) also simplifies enforcement. I also like how throw-ins can now be corrected after the throw-in ends.

[Raymond]

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.

I've had many occasions where the throw-in spot was in dispute amongst the crew.

As far as the bolded statement, why can't the other officials come to the throw-in spot instead of having the administering official come to them? Your approach makes zero logical sense to me.

[Raymond]

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.

Jeff was specifically commenting about shorts, why are you posting references about jerseys?

[Nevadaref]

I like all of the changes. I believe that eliminating 1&1 speeds up the end of games as teams are less likely to foul since they will be conceding two free throws and the team with the lead would have to miss both in order to not increase its advantage.

I do have a question about the new rule permitting an incorrect throw-in to be fixed.

“7-6-6: Allows the official administering a throw-in to the wrong team to correct the mistake before the first dead ball after the ball becomes live unless there is a change of possession. Rationale: Allows for a correction of an official's mistake in a more reasonable timeframe.”

Why does it have to be only the administering official who can correct this? I hope that it will be worded such that any of the officials can do so.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

... why can't the other officials come to the throw-in spot instead of having the administering official come to them?

Sets up a lopsided coverage of the court.

During a timeout we need at least one official at the division line ready to beckon in subs, prevent subs from entering after the warning horn, and ready to address any questions from the table, or from polite coaches.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Jeff was specifically commenting about shorts, why are you posting references about jerseys?

Because he seemed to be confusing the new shorts rule with the old and existing jersey rule (that only cites jerseys).

In the past some officials new to our local area, questioned seeing different color (junior varsity and varsity) shorts and in varsity games, something that they might not have been exposed to in their previous local area (it is rare in a high school games), and had to be told that (at the time) there were no NFHS color restrictions on shorts.

Since my post I have discovered that JRutledge is actually questioning the language of the new shorts rule, wondering if "like color" means the same (or similar) color, a valid question that we'll both have to wait to get answered until the NFHS publishes the actual rule language and interpretations.

I'm leaning toward "like color" meaning the same (or similar) color, but with my history of mind reading the NFHS, I'm not betting my house on it.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Why does it have to be only the administering official who can correct this?

Maybe it will allow communication between officials but leave it up the administering official to actually decide to reverse the call, similar to how we already communicate on possibly reversing a partner's questionable out of bounds call.

"Hey partner. We may have screwed up that throwin a few seconds ago. What do you think? Should you reverse it? You were the administering official."

I've got a good question.

Back to original spot of throwin, or to the point of interruption?

I'm guessing point of interruption, but but with my history of mind reading the NFHS, I'm not betting my villa in Tuscany on it.

If a head coach politely questions the nonadministering official, who is convinced into also questioning the throwin, and then stops the game to discuss with the administering official, and both officials decide that no error was made, it will definitely be point of interruption.

I would think that to also be true if the throwin was reversed - point of interruption.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Because he seemed to be confusing the new shorts rule with the old and existing jersey rule (that only cites jerseys).

In the past some officials new to our local area, questioned seeing different color (junior varsity and varsity) shorts and in varsity games, something that they might not have been exposed to in their previous local area, and had to be told that (at the time) there were no NFHS color restrictions on shorts.

Since my post I have discovered that JRutledge is actually questioning the language of the new shorts rule, wondering if "like color" means the same (or similar) color, a valid question that we'll both have to wait to get answered until the NFHS publishes the actual rule language and interpretations.

I'm leaning toward "like color" meaning the same (or similar) color, but with my history of mind reading the NFHS, I'm not betting my house on it.

I was not confused by anything. My take was specifically that the rule basically was not a change, it was simply a clarification and not even explained what "similar color" means. It did not say they had to share the same color. It would be like a player that was on the sophomore or JV team playing with the varsity and they had a white jersey but the stripe is different. We already allowed that. Or if there is white on much of the shorts, but not totally white but the other teammates are wearing all white. So are we not allowing that to take place? Again, pretty much what the rule was before IMO unless they say it is more restrictive (which interpretation).

I know you do not get this fact, but many people know rules just as good as you if not better. Or been in situations that you might not have experienced. I literally work HS basketball in two states. And one of those states the NF Headquarters is located. IJS.

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Sets up a lopsided coverage of the court. During a timeout we need at least one official at the division line ready to beckon in subs, prevent subs for entering after the warning horn, and ready to address any questions from the table, or from polite coaches.

It's laziness. You can see subs from the throw-in spot. If you're having a meeting with your partners, coaches questions can wait. If the table needs information, then tend to that instead of having a referee gossip session.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Because he seemed to be confusing the new shorts rule with the old and existing jersey rule (that only cites jerseys).
...

I wasn't confused. He clearly was talking about "shorts". He doesn't work games in Connecticutt, so he wasn't one of those officials you reference. I knew exactly what he was talking about. You probably confused some newcomers by conflating rules.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I like all of the changes. I believe that eliminating 1&1 speeds up the end of games as teams are less likely to foul since they will be conceding two free throws and the team with the lead would have to miss both in order to not increase its advantage.

I do have a question about the new rule permitting an incorrect throw-in to be fixed.

“7-6-6: Allows the official administering a throw-in to the wrong team to correct the mistake before the first dead ball after the ball becomes live unless there is a change of possession. Rationale: Allows for a correction of an official's mistake in a more reasonable timeframe.”

Why does it have to be only the administering official who can correct this? I hope that it will be worded such that any of the officials can do so.

I agree. If I'm a non-administering official and I notice it, I'm fixing it.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Maybe it will allow communication between officials but leave it up the administering official to actually decide to reverse the call, similar to how we already communicate on possibly reversing a partner's questionable out of bounds call.

"Hey partner. We may have screwed up that throwin a few seconds ago. What do you think? Should you reverse it? You were the administering official."

I've got a good question.

Back to original spot of throwin, or to the point of interruption?

I'm guessing point of interruption, but but with my history of mind reading the NFHS, I'm not betting my house on it.

And time elapsed from the clock?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I like all of the changes. I believe that eliminating 1&1 speeds up the end of games as teams are less likely to foul since they will be conceding two free throws and the team with the lead would have to miss both in order to not increase its advantage.

I do have a question about the new rule permitting an incorrect throw-in to be fixed.

“7-6-6: Allows the official administering a throw-in to the wrong team to correct the mistake before the first dead ball after the ball becomes live unless there is a change of possession. Rationale: Allows for a correction of an official's mistake in a more reasonable timeframe.”

Why does it have to be only the administering official who can correct this? I hope that it will be worded such that any of the officials can do so.

To me, this is like saying the Referee designates the scorebook and officials scorer before the game starts or says the Referee inspects all the equipment, court, backboard, and other things. We know we do that as a crew, not just the Referee, and inspecting is not going up to each item and seeing if it is legal. We do that together and if my partner does not feel something is right, I am not saying "I'm the Referee so I can only do......" We do this together. Bad wording for what is reality, but if the non-administring officials notice something, we changing it if it is wrong. Just my opinion.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Sets up a lopsided coverage of the court.

During a timeout we need at least one official at the division line ready to beckon in subs, prevent subs from entering after the warning horn, and ready to address any questions from the table, or from polite coaches.

I do not think I have ever had an official at the division line for subs. At least not mechanically. Officials talk to each other all the time in my parts and it is encouraged. We can observe the subs from our location no matter on the court. And you must be talking about only 2 person, that is the only mechanic set that has officials at the division line.

Peace