|
New penalty for 9-2 violations
Has anyone really looked at the new language in the penalty section for NFHS rule 9-2?
Situation: A1 is dribbling the ball in his frontcourt. B1 knocks the ball away and it goes out of bounds on the sideline five feet from the end line on the side of the court with the scorer’s table and team benches. A3 is awarded a throw-in from that location. He attempts a cross-court pass to A5, which goes over his head and out of bounds on the far side of the court without any player touching the ball. Where is Team B awarded the ensuing throw-in? |
Nearest of the 4 spots -- so 28' mark, bench side
|
Quote:
An unannounced rule change. |
Magic Bus (The Who, 1968) …
https://tse1.mm.bing.net/th/id/OIP.U...=Api&P=0&h=180
I struggled with this four “magic spots" rule last season (now in both the frontcourt and the backcourt). Old dog, new tricks. I’m hoping I can do better this coming season. Of course, it would be easier if the schools put the proper lines on the courts (it may take several years for these lines to show up on my middle school courts). And it didn't help that I had several partners who didn't give a damn about the new throwin spot rules. Best “rules of thumb” I can figure out: 1) All whistles except out of bounds calls go to the “magic spots" (above situation was a throwin violation, not an out of bounds violation). 2) Only one exception, whistle for timeout during a throwin goes back to the original throwin spot, be it for an original out of bounds call, or otherwise. 3) All backcourt violation whistles, on the division line, or over the division line, go to the new frontcourt “magic spot”. Is that it? Is it really that simple? Wish me luck, and maybe some better partners who give a damn. Any chance that sometime down the line all throwins will be from “magic spots”? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk |
Backcourt Violations ...
Quote:
Fixed it. 3) All backcourt violation whistles, on the division line, or over the division line, go to the new frontcourt “magic spot”. |
2025–26 Corrections And Clarifications ...
Quote:
Despite the best efforts of the NFHS Basketball Rules Committee, one of the ongoing challenges following the approval of new rules each year is ensuring that every related reference in both the Rules Book and Case Book is updated accurately. Even with multiple levels of review, occasional inconsistencies and oversights can still occur. Once the NFHS publishes these changes, IAABO leaders must then interpret and integrate them into the IAABO Rules Guide, a process that can also present challenges. From time to time, we identify areas where revisions or clarifications are needed to ensure consistency across all publications. This article highlights the corrections and clarifications that have been identified and addresses several frequently asked questions that have surfaced as officials prepare for the upcoming season. Items marked with a single asterisk “*” have been posted on the NFHS website or addressed in a memo to state associations. Items marked with two asterisks “**” have been approved but not yet published. Any affected items appearing in IAABO publications will be corrected in the 2026–27 Handbook. Some of the items that are currently unpublished may be updated throughout the season and we will update this information as it become available. IAABO Refresher Exam #32 One of the most challenging questions on the IAABO Refresher Exam was related to determining the proper throw-in spot following a throw-in violation. The question is written as follows: During a throw-in after an out-of-bounds violation, A-1 lobs a pass that lodges between the rim and backboard. The official awards the ball to Team B at the original throw-in spot. Is this correct? Many officials answered “Yes” to this question and were surprised to learn the correct answer was “No.” Keep in mind the original throw-in spot in the question was after an out-of-bounds violation. Likely, the throw-in is not one of the four spots. When A-1 commits a throw-in violation (for not throwing the ball directly onto the court so it is touched by a player), the penalty for that infraction will cause the ensuing throw-in to move to one of the four designated spots (IRG 9:2, NFHS 7-5-3, 7-5-4, 9-2-8). |
Situation: A1 is dribbling the ball in his frontcourt. B1 knocks the ball away and it goes out of bounds on the sideline five feet from the end line on the side of the court with the scorer’s table and team benches.
A3 is awarded a throw-in from that location. B3 commits Team B's first boundary plane violation. Where is Team A awarded the ensuing throw-in? I don't have last year's rule book. Did the edit to 7-5-3 that is shaded now to include 9-2 change this as well? Team A now gets the ball out of the corner and to the 28' mark? |
The Plot Thickens ...
Quote:
Nobody post until I pop some popcorn. https://dontgetserious.com/wp-conten...-2-300x300.png |
Quote:
By that logic, the boundary plane violation during a throw-in for an out of bounds violation would not alter the ensuing throw-in or move it to the nearest of the 4-spot locations. Perhaps the NFHS will release a clarification. |
Quote:
|
Plane violation by the opponent essentially goes to POI. For clarity sakes it should be moved out of the throw in violation section.
|
Don’t confuse the delay of game warning administrative procedure with actual violations. They aren’t the same. In fact, the only infraction that results in a warning that is a violation is the breaking of the boundary plane.
Although I would agree that prior to this season it appeared that any of the delay warnings looked like it resulted in using the POI process. With this rule change for throw-ins, I’m not certain that I can make that claim now. |
Remains An Alternating Possession Throwin ...
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:29pm. |