2025-26 NFHS Rules Changes

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Why do you need a diagram for an out of bounds violation? Throw in from the exact spot the ball went out of bounds except between the lane lines. Am I missing something?

No, I'm missing something, and I overthought (or underthought) the concept.

I was distracted by this:

7-5-4: This rule change updates the procedure for determining the designated throw-in spot following a stoppage of play (not due to the ball going out of bounds) in the frontcourt.

So I guess that the Rocket Ship Diagram (© 2009, Back In The Saddle) has blasted off on its last journey.

Right?

[SNIPERBBB]

No more rocket ship. Unfortunately people aren't very good with the rocket ship. They thought everything inside the arc went to the endline spots.

[ilyazhito]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

No more rocket ship. Unfortunately people aren't very good with the rocket ship. They thought everything inside the arc went to the endline spots.

Interesting. I used the rocket ship when it was a thing. However, the NFHS is trying to idiot-proof the spots where the ball goes.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

In high school ...

Slapping the backboard, with, or without intent, is no longer a technical foul, never.

However, if the backboard is slapped, with, or without intent, and it affects the shot such that it doesn't go in the basket, we can award the goal for basket interference.

However, if the backboard is slapped, with, or without intent, and it does not affect the shot that doesn't go in the basket, we cannot award the goal.

Old rules regarding putting hand on the backboard or ring to gain an advantage (the Ralph Sampson Rule) are still in place and we can charge a technical foul.

Can anyone confirm my personal interpretation of the new rules regarding basket interference and slapping the backboard while still leaving the Ralph Sampson Rule in place?

[Raymond]

Best I can say is that in NCAA Men's basketball, slapping the backboard is basket interference if it vibrates the ring while the ball is on it.

I'd have to look back, but I would think Jeff probably provided the Men's interpretation.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

Interesting. I used the rocket ship when it was a thing. However, the NFHS is trying to idiot-proof the spots where the ball goes.

As much as it is being put in place so players and coaches can easily discern the throw in spot, it's also in place because of the laziness and inattention to detail many officials have shown over the years.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Will we still use the Rocket Ship Diagram for out of bounds violations?



Rocket Ship Diagram © 2009, Back In The Saddle

Did we ever use it for OOB? OOB has always been the spot nearest where the ball went OOB. The"rocket ship" was for violations that happened on the playing court; OOB, by definition, doesn't happen there.

edit: I see Raymond made a similar response. Missed it in my first glance through the thread -- internet has been out for nearly three days and I am rushing to catch up.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Did we ever use it for OOB?

In a limited manner, when the ball went out of bounds on the end line between the lane lines.

I still screwed up and deserved the double scolding.

[Zoochy]

7-5-4: This rule change updates the procedure for determining the designated throw-in spot following a stoppage of play (not due to the ball going out of bounds) in the frontcourt.
So, what if there is a stoppage of play in the Backcourt? Rocket Ship? Or use existing 3-point marking?

[ilyazhito]

Originally Posted by Zoochy

7-5-4: This rule change updates the procedure for determining the designated throw-in spot following a stoppage of play (not due to the ball going out of bounds) in the frontcourt.
So, what if there is a stoppage of play in the Backcourt? Rocket Ship? Or use existing 3-point marking?

The rocket ship should still apply in the backcourt. In NFHS rules now, any stoppage in the frontcourt, other than OOB, uses the 4 designated spots.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Zoochy

Elton John

Nice. One of my favorite Elton John songs.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

The rocket ship should still apply in the backcourt. In NFHS rules now, any stoppage in the frontcourt, other than OOB, uses the 4 designated spots.

The Rocket Ship lives on to blast off again!

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Zoochy

7-5-4: This rule change updates the procedure for determining the designated throw-in spot following a stoppage of play (not due to the ball going out of bounds) in the frontcourt.

So, what if there is a stoppage of play in the Backcourt? Rocket Ship? Or use existing 3-point marking?

Nevermind my original response, misread post.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

Interesting. I used the rocket ship when it was a thing. However, the NFHS is trying to idiot-proof the spots where the ball goes.

Coaches were arguing over the location of a throw-in, now we do have that debate in the FC.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Can anyone confirm my personal interpretation of the new rules regarding basket interference and slapping the backboard while still leaving the Ralph Sampson Rule in place?

Originally Posted by Raymond

Best I can say is that in NCAA Men's basketball, slapping the backboard is basket interference if it vibrates the ring while the ball is on it.

I'd have to look back, but I would think Jeff probably provided the Men's interpretation.

The college interpretation was simple. If the ball was influenced by the vibrating of the backboard or rim because of a slap, then you could call BI on these plays. Simply hitting the backboard was not enough because sometimes the ball never made it on the basket or rim, even if there was a slap. Still some judgment, but that was how it was interpreted. Now, what the NF will ultimately say or use is still up for some debate. I believe they are adopting the current college interpretation, but they tend to retain some aspects specific to the NF. Just look at the rollout with the flopping and how many iterations of that application that was mulled over and still are being mulled over.

Peace