2023-2024 Rules Changes Announced.

[Robert Goodman]

The rest I get, but...

Originally Posted by BillyMac

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. Rationale: Simplifies throw-in procedure when there is team control in the frontcourt and the defensive team commits a violation.

How is that a simplification?

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

The rest I get, but...
How is that a simplification?

It's not. That's just their justification.

But, it's not a hard rule to nail down as an official. The change was fine in NCAA-M and NCAA-W. The only confusion has been where to put the ball on certain backcourt violations, which they have clarified in recent years (on the men's side).

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

The rest I get, but...


How is that a simplification?

No more worrying about the exact spot based of the violation/foul or ball location when a timeout is granted. If the throw is on the sideline, go to the 28 ft line, if it is on the end line, go to the 3-ft mark outside the lane line

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by SC Official

Standardized throw-in spots are whatever. Coaches want to be able to draw plays from the consistent spots.

Originally Posted by Raymond

No more worrying about the exact spot ...

... unless the defensive team causes a ball to be out of bounds, when the throw-in shall be the spot where the ball went out of bounds.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

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.

Agree that eliminating the one-and-one will reduce rebounding opportunities and rough play.

Agree that this will reduce SOME correctable errors, for example scorers not notifying officials of the change from the old bonus (one and one) to the old "double" bonus (two free throws) will be eliminated. Most of our middle schools do not show team fouls on the scoreboard.

Disagree because SOME correctable errors will double, the change from no free throws to bonus (now two free throws) will happen four times a game instead of twice a game, now four chances for the scorers to screw up and not notify officials of the change.

I believe that the correctable errors regarding these "bonus" situations will even out, no more, no less.

Still four times a game for the scorer to screw up, especially in my middle school games.

Another good thing, fewer non-shooter free throw violations.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

... unless the defensive team causes a ball to be out of bounds, when the throw-in shall be the spot where the ball went out of bounds.

The Rocket Ship Diagram ( 2009, Back In The Saddle) lives on.

There is no "unless", that's already accounted for in the rules. Don't need a rocket ship diagram for an out of bounds call. It's easy to know where that throw in spot will be.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Don't need a rocket ship diagram for an out of bounds call. It's easy to know where that throw in spot will be.

Great point Raymond. Thanks. I fixed my post.

Will the rocket ship diagram still be used to determine a sideline "spot", or an endlne "spot", when a defensive team commits a violation, a common foul prior to the bonus, or the ball becomes dead?

I took Mr. Fiore's geometry class and Mr. Madden's trigonometry class over 50 years ago, but I still may remember enough to know that "nearest" (new rule language) spot may not necessarily be determined from the rocket ship diagram.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

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.

Wouldn't a new diagram look like diagonal lines coming out of each corner at 45 degree angles, meeting somewhere near the top of the key, and then becoming the basket line?



Now I have to remember to carry a protractor in my back pocket.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Great point Raymond. Thanks. I fixed my post.

Will the rocket ship diagram still be used to determine a sideline "spot", or an endlne "spot", when a defensive team commits a violation, a common foul prior to the bonus, or the ball becomes dead?

I took Mr. Fiore's geometry class and Mr. Madden's trigonometry class over 50 years ago, but I still may remember enough to know that "nearest" (new rule language) spot may not necessarily be determined from the rocket ship diagram.




Wouldn't a new diagram look like diagonal lines coming out of each corner at 45 degree angles, meeting near the top of the key, and then becoming the basket line?



Now I have to remember to carry a protractor in my back pocket.

I don't expect the diagram to change aside form the destination of the throw in. The wording "nearest" wording isn't any different. The original diagram is easy to judge because the FT semi-circle gives you distinct lines to use instead of eye-balling an imaginary line....and the difference is very subtle.

That said, the current college diagram appears to exclude the semi-circle and would push those to the side. See Page 72 of https://www.quickscores.com/download...l_Rulebook.pdf. (2021-22 NCAA-M book)

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

... the difference is very subtle.

Agree. Maybe a couple of square feet?

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

... the current college diagram appears to exclude the semi-circle and would push those to the side.

NCAA Out of Bounds and the Throw-in - Ball Awarded Out of Bounds
7.3.2.B: Officials shall determine the designated spot in sub-paragraph a. above by using an imaginary line drawn from the intersection of the end line with the sideline to each lane line where it intersects with the free-throw line. If the stoppage of play occurs inside the imaginary line, the designated spot shall be the nearest point on the end line 3-feet outside the lane line. (See number 1 on court diagram below.) If the stoppage occurs outside the imaginary line, the designated spot shall be the nearest sideline at the 28-foot line. (See number 2 on court diagram below.)

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

The rest I get, but...
How is that a simplification?

You don't have to worry about a precise throwin spot when making the call. You only have to decide side/end, table/opposite. You are not going to be fussing around with moving the player 5-10 feet to the "right" spot or even communicating the exact spots to your partners.

To me, that does make it simpler (to administer).

The players/coaches will, in time, begin to know it and will habitually go to the right spot without being told (unless the decision of side/end is close).

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

You don't have to worry about a precise throwin spot when making the call ... The players/coaches will, in time, begin to know it and will habitually go to the right spot without being told ...

... unless the defensive team causes a ball to be out of bounds, when the throw-in shall be the spot where the ball went out of bounds.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

The rest I get, but...
How is that a simplification?

If it is the college rule, very much simplified. You are not having to split hairs where you put the ball.

Now the only question that I do not know is if that applies to a simple out-of-bounds violation. Does it only apply to a travel or kicked ball for example? But you do not have to debate where it goes anymore or be halfway down the sideline in the corner as opposed to bringing it out to one of the spots.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Basically what I see is a bunch of college rules they adopted. The only issue are they going to make some exceptions to some things that the other levels do.

Peace