2023-2024 Rules Changes Announced.

[SC Official]

So now NCAA-M is the only level that, inexplicably, still is not using quarters and retaining the 1-and-1.

Standardized throw-in spots are whatever. Coaches want to be able to draw plays from the consistent spots. Not a big deal.

The 7-6-6 change is just common sense and brings the written rule in line with how it was already handled. NCAA-M did the same thing last year.

The black undershirt change is a good one. Wish they had taken it a step further and gotten rid of ALL undershirt color restrictions.

The 9-3-3 change just brings the rule in line with NCAA. No one ever enforced the "leaving the court for an unauthorized reason" verbiage.

Overall, a good year of changes for FED. Granted, I'm sure they will create confusion when they actually put the changes into the rule book, as they seem to do every year.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by SC Official

So now NCAA-M is the only level that, inexplicably, still is not using quarters and retaining the 1-and-1.



Standardized throw-in spots are whatever. Coaches want to be able to draw plays from the consistent spots. Not a big deal.



The 7-6-6 change is just common sense and brings the written rule in line with how it was already handled. NCAA-M did the same thing last year.



The black undershirt change is a good one. Wish they had taken it a step further and gotten rid of ALL undershirt color restrictions.



The 9-3-3 change just brings the rule in line with NCAA. No one ever enforced the "leaving the court for an unauthorized reason" verbiage.



Overall, a good year of changes for FED. Granted, I'm sure they will create confusion when they actually put the changes into the rule book, as they seem to do every year.

I like the 20-minute halves. Never understood the obsession or fascination with quarters.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by Raymond

I like the 20-minute halves. Never understood the obsession or fascination with quarters.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

I mainly want it to be able to reset fouls every quarter like NCAA-W and NBA. Granted, I guess they could do that with halves (or eliminate 1-and-1 but keep double bonus on 10th), but it would be a little messier.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by SC Official

The black undershirt change is a good one. Wish they had taken it a step further and gotten rid of ALL undershirt color restrictions.

Disagree. I've officiated preseason jamboree-type scrimmages with multiple teams wearing reversible jerseys that reverse them from game to game. But players usually only bring one color undershirt to these scrimmages, so our local guys never enforce undershirt rules in scrimmages (after all, they're only scrimmages) but do remind coaches of these rules for when the season officially begins.

While officiating such scrimmages, with multiple color undershirts on both teams, I always notice how ever so slightly harder it is to identity players, especially in bang bang plays where the ball suddenly deflects out of bounds from a scrum of players, or when a swarm of players are elbowing each other for a rebound.

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?

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Disagree. I've officiated preseason jamboree-type scrimmages with multiple teams wearing reversible jerseys that reverse them from game to game. But players usually only bring one color undershirt to these scrimmages, so our local guys never enforce undershirt rules in scrimmages (after all, they're only scrimmages) but do remind coaches of these rules for when the season officially begins.

While officiating such scrimmages, with multiple color undershirts on both teams, I always notice how ever so slightly harder it is to identity players, especially in bang bang plays where the ball suddenly deflects out of bounds from a scrum of players, or when a swarm of players are elbowing each other for a rebound.

Regarding the change to 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've officiated countless "offseason" events where the undershirt rule is not enforced and never have I had an issue with identifying players nor have I heard one of my colleagues say they had trouble identifying players.

To each his own, I guess.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by SC Official

I've officiated countless "offseason" events where the undershirt rule is not enforced and never have I had an issue with identifying players nor have I heard one of my colleagues say they had trouble identifying players.

Had a game last year where I wished (for only a half a second) that the NFHS had color rules for shoes and socks. A ball deflected out of bounds near the sideline off of one of the feet of two players standing next to each other. I clearly identified the correct foot (one of four possibilities) but must have erred following the foot up the leg to the jersey, as I was politely told by a fan closer than me.

[SC Official]

Regarding the new throw-in rules, NFHS will need to clarify whether or not the ball moves to one of the four spots if a timeout is called by either team following the ball going out of bounds. NCAA-M had to clarify a few years ago that the throw-in spot is still where the ball went out of bounds and calling a timeout doesn't "buy" you the closest of the four spots (so if the ball goes out in the corner, the throw-in will be there even if a timeout is called).

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by SC Official

Regarding the new throw-in rules, NFHS will need to clarify whether or not the ball moves to one of the four spots if a timeout is called by either team following the ball going out of bounds. NCAA-M had to clarify a few years ago that the throw-in spot is still where the ball went out of bounds and calling a timeout doesn't "buy" you the closest of the four spots (so if the ball goes out in the corner, the throw-in will be there even if a timeout is called).

I was going to ask about inadvertent whistles, but I see the phrase "when the ball becomes dead" is included.

Also, if we have a kicked ball during a throw in that was created by an out of bounds call. Do we stay at the same spot since the throw-in never ended?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

... if we have a kicked ball during a throw in that was created by an out of bounds call. Do we stay at the same spot since the throw-in never ended?

Great question. I like the way you think.

So is the next throw in for a kicking violation?

If so, move the new throwin to the nearest of the four spots to the kicking violation.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

7-5-2 thru 5: Establishes four throw-in spots ... 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.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by SC Official

Regarding the new throw-in rules, NFHS will need to clarify whether or not the ball moves to one of the four spots if a timeout is called by either team following the ball going out of bounds. NCAA-M had to clarify a few years ago that the throw-in spot is still where the ball went out of bounds and calling a timeout doesn't "buy" you the closest of the four spots (so if the ball goes out in the corner, the throw-in will be there even if a timeout is called).

That shouldn't "need" clarifying, but you're probably right. A timeout only pauses things where they were in HS basketball. You always go back to where the game was when the timeout was called with nothing being changed. But, someone will probably make it a point to question that.

[SNIPERBBB]

Originally Posted by SC Official

Regarding the new throw-in rules, NFHS will need to clarify whether or not the ball moves to one of the four spots if a timeout is called by either team following the ball going out of bounds. NCAA-M had to clarify a few years ago that the throw-in spot is still where the ball went out of bounds and calling a timeout doesn't "buy" you the closest of the four spots (so if the ball goes out in the corner, the throw-in will be there even if a timeout is called).

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

[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.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by SC Official

Regarding the new throw-in rules, NFHS will need to clarify whether or not the ball moves to one of the four spots if a timeout is called by either team following the ball going out of bounds.

2023-24 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretations

SITUATION 1: Team A has possession of the ball in its frontcourt when the ball is deflected out of bounds by Team B. The ball exits the court along the end line close to the right sideline. Team A is granted an inbounds at the location where the ball exited the court. While Team A is trying to inbounds the ball, Team A calls a time-out. After the time-out, the inbounds spot (a) returns to the same spot; (b) moves to the designated spot 3 feet outside of the lane along the end line. RULING: (a) Correct procedure; (b) Incorrect procedure. COMMENT: Since the ball was not on the court, the time-out did not create a “stoppage in play” that would move the inbounds spot to one of the four designated spots. Play will continue from the inbounds spot established by the deflection of the ball by Team B. (7-5-2, 7-5-3a)

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

2023-24 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretations SITUATION 1: Team A has possession of the ball in its frontcourt when the ball is deflected out of bounds by Team B. The ball exits the court along the end line close to the right sideline. Team A is granted an inbounds at the location where the ball exited the court. While Team A is trying to inbounds the ball, Team A calls a time-out. After the time-out, the inbounds spot (a) returns to the same spot; (b) moves to the designated spot 3 feet outside of the lane along the end line. RULING: (a) Correct procedure; (b) Incorrect procedure. COMMENT: Since the ball was not on the court, the time-out did not create a “stoppage in play” that would move the inbounds spot to one of the four designated spots. Play will continue from the inbounds spot established by the deflection of the ball by Team B. (7-5-2, 7-5-3a)

What if Team A requests and is granted a timeout immediately after the out of bounds violation, before the throwin begins?

[JRutledge]

• Rule 4-8-1 eliminates the one-and-one scenario and sets new foul limits each quarter for awarding the bonus free throw. Fouls

I think this change was for change sake. I really do not see this changing how the game is played for the most part. I think this was a college rule that people have been begging for and they finally gave in. I see almost no situation where this reduces fouls or reduces many FT opportunities. We get to 10 fouls a lot of times in games, so why are we now acting like this changes anything?

• The throw-in procedure for front-court violations was simplified in Rules 7-5-2 through 7-5-5.

This is a great rules change because it eliminates the debate of where the ball goes in almost every situation. Now, they did not seem to make clear if this was a difference for out of bounds situations. Sounds like it is a similar change to the college rule, but this explanation does not solve that issue.

• Rule 2-1-3 establishes the official placement of a shot clock operator at the scorer’s table for those states utilizing the shot clock.

OK, effects almost none of us.

• 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.

Pretty much the rule before.

• Rule 3-5-6 addresses undershirts and allows teams to wear a single solid color or solid black for visiting teams with dark jerseys. This provides an opportunity for schools with hard-to-find colors to have all players wear a black undershirt.

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.

• Rule 9-3-3 was amended to allow a player to step out of bounds and return to the court if the player gains no advantage. A player is penalized only if, after returning inbounds, the player is the first to touch the ball or avoids a violation.

Again a college rule that is great. This rarely happened anyway, but it needed to be based on what they were doing. If they did not get the ball, why trouble, trouble and stop the game? Great change and glad it took place finally. The rule at the NCAA Men's level was more reasonable.

Peace