2023-2024 Rules Changes Announced.

[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).

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

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.

Yeah, I get it, rules that restrict equipment colors benefit officials by allowing them to easily identify players on each team during fast paced action.

But 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).

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

Quoth the raven, "Nevermore".

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by SC Official

No one ever enforced the "leaving the court for an unauthorized reason" verbiage.

Never called it myself, but few years ago (maybe it was a few decades ago) I had an offensive player run out of bounds around a screen, and he almost ran me over as the lead official. It surprised me, and I let it go, but vowed to call the violation the next time he did it. After a switch after a foul, my partner was now the lead on the same endline and made the call without me telling him anything about the situation.

Over forty-plus years, I've called a few violations for players who step out of bounds in an attempt to avoid a three second violation.

Called a foul on a player (not her fifth foul) who's body language showed that she was upset with the official who made the foul call and then ran off the court (not waiting for a substitute) straight into the locker room. After checking with the coach that it was for an unauthorized reason (not a bathroom break, injury, etc.) we charged her with the technical foul. Seen this called only once in forty-plus years.

[JRutledge]

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.

Until you find a way to not lose money, then that will not change.

And as Raymond said, I do not get the fascination with quarters. I wish the NF would go to Quarters. A better flow if you ask me with halves.

Peace

[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

[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

[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

[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.

[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.

[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

[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.

[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.)

[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

[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.