New Rules 2026-2027

[JRutledge]

New Rules Press Release

Welp, they have been released.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Here is the Press Release!!!!

Guidelines to help game officials manage the game clock at the end of each quarter and other timing errors are among the major rules changes in high school basketball for the 2026-27 season.

The two additions addressing the game clock in Rule 5 (5-9-5 and 5-10-2 Note) were among the five rules changes recommended by the NFHS Basketball Rules Committee at its April 27-29 meeting in Indianapolis. All rules changes were reviewed by the NFHS Rules Review Committee and approved by the NFHS Board of Directors.

In the last 59.9 seconds of each quarter and overtime periods, a minimum of three-tenths (0.3) of a second must expire from the game clock when the ball is legally touched by a player inbounds after a throw-in. This addition of Rule 5-9-5 is consistent with the tap-in rule in Rule 5-2-5, however, does not apply if the game clock does not display tenths of a second.

Rule 5-10-2 Note was added to allow officials to utilize a silent count in the event of a clock malfunction. If an official determines the clock was not started or stopped properly, a silent count may be used as definitive knowledge to correct the timing error.

“These changes provide officials with clearer guidance and help provide greater consistency in administering end-of-quarter timing situations, while also ensuring there are practical solutions available when timing errors or clock malfunctions occur,” said Monica Maxwell, NFHS director of sports and liaison to the Basketball Rules Committee.

Rule 8-6-4 was added to establish a single dead-ball period at approximately the same time when assessing if technical fouls committed by opposing teams cancel. Specifically, in this instance, all technical fouls are considered to be committed at approximately the same time for the purposes of offsetting their penalties and play would resume at the point of interruption.

Rule 9-2 Penalty clarified that when an infraction occurs on a throw-in, the location of the violation is the original throw-in spot. If the original throw-in spot is not a designated spot, the ensuing throw-in is moved to such a spot.

Lastly, Rule 6-4-4g was removed. With changes last year that modified the procedures when addressing faking being fouled, it was no longer applicable.

A complete listing of the basketball rules changes will be available on the NFHS website at www.nfhs.org. Click on “Sports” at the top of the home page and select “Basketball” and then “Rules.” The print version of the 2026-27 Basketball Rules Book will be available for purchase in late July at www.NFHS.com, and the digital version will be available in July via NFHS Digital at www.NFHS.org.

According to the 2024-25 NFHS High School Athletics Participation Survey, basketball is the third-most popular sport for boys with 540,704 participants in 18,690 schools nationwide. For girls, it ranks fourth with 356,240 participants in 18,208 schools.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Thanks, JRutledge.

The ketchup came out of the bottle a lot faster than I thought that it would come out.

[BillyMac]

After the changes over the past two or three years, it will be nice to have a "quiet" year.

Our new rule interpretation meeting in the fall should be over in about fifteen minutes.

Too bad it's a one way forty-five minute drive to the meeting site.

Maybe we should change it to a Zoom meeting?

[Stat-Man]

These rule changes actually make sense.

5-9-5 seems to align NFHS with other codes requiring a minimum 0.3 s coming off the clock when the ball is immediately touched on a throw-in and immediately goes out of bounds again.

5-10-2 Note appears to codify what many officials did in practice in keeping a silent count as soon as they realized there was a clock issue until it could be addressed. I actually did this in a game this past season when a clock stopped when it shouldn't have.

8-6-4 will make it easier to administer multiple technical fouls that happen during the same dead ball that wouldn't qualify as double technicals previously.

I'm not sure if 9-2 Penalty is saying a non-spot throw in having an infraction now becomes a "magic spot" throw in. Awaiting further clarification for this one.

Glad to see the upcoming changes are minor tweaks.

[SNIPERBBB]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

After the changes over the past two or three years, it will be nice to have a "quiet" year.

Our new rule interpretation meeting in the fall should be over in about fifteen minutes.

Too bad it's a one way forty-five minute one drive to the meeting site.

Maybe we should change it to a Zoom meeting?

Ours has been basically a PowerPoint presentation for the last 10 or so years. Only the interpreter meeting is live now over Teams.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Stat-Man

5-10-2 Note appears to codify what many officials did in practice in keeping a silent count as soon as they realized there was a clock issue until it could be addressed. I actually did this in a game this past season when a clock stopped when it shouldn't have.

This is the only rule change which is poor. Just employ a visible count. Without video replay and the ability to time a play with a stopwatch, a visible count that shows up on video validates adjusting the clock. A silent count in one’s head will just lead to problems.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

This is the only rule change which is poor. Just employ a visible count. Without video replay and the ability to time a play with a stopwatch, a visible count that shows up on video validates adjusting the clock. A silent count in one’s head will just lead to problems.

What if the throw-in is in the front court? Why is this poor when many officials, especially near the end of game do a count in their head to get an idea where the clock might be? Sorry, but the idea that only definite knowledge is when you look at the clock and you really do not know if someone looked at the clock is kind of silly.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Stat-Man

These rule changes actually make sense.

5-9-5 seems to align NFHS with other codes requiring a minimum 0.3 s coming off the clock when the ball is immediately touched on a throw-in and immediately goes out of bounds again.

You should have already been able to take some time off the clock if you know the clock never started properly. This just helps put it in writing so people cannot try to be so pure and not have any realistic guidelines.

Originally Posted by Stat-Man

8-6-4 will make it easier to administer multiple technical fouls that happen during the same dead ball that wouldn't qualify as double technicals previously.

I would like further clarification on this one. The Men's rule is kind of like this, but there are caveats, too. I would like to see how close they get to the other language of the NCAA, if at all.

Originally Posted by Stat-Man

I'm not sure if 9-2 Penalty is saying a non-spot throw in having an infraction now becomes a "magic spot" throw in. Awaiting further clarification for this one.

I think I know what they mean, but I will need clarification for a badly worded description. I think this basically means we do not move the spot if the violation took place while the throw-in was active. Like you have an out-of-bounds violation, and the next throw-in, the team causes a violation, like a 5-second count or steps over the line. Or the one that was really debated, what if I throw the ball out of bounds and no one touches the ball during the throw-in. Before we would bring it back to that spot. People debated if it should go to the 4 spots. You do not completely move the spot just because you have a violation. But that will need specifics as their wording was also talking about designated spots specifically. What if it is a throw-in that allows you to run the endline? You could move the throw-in spot several feet in those cases.

Peace

[bob jenkins]

It's like this every year. they send out a general statement, and we have to (or should) wait until the detailed rules and cases come out. Some / Most questions will be answered; others might be raised. Discussing it in any detail before then is a waste of time.

And "visible" and "silent" are not exclusive.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

And "visible" and "silent" are not exclusive.

Different senses.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Stat-Man

5-10-2 Note appears to codify what many officials did in practice in keeping a silent count as soon as they realized there was a clock issue until it could be addressed. I actually did this in a game this past season when a clock stopped when it shouldn't have.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

A silent count in one’s head will just lead to problems.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

.. many officials, especially near the end of game do a count in their head to get an idea where the clock might be? Sorry, but the idea that only definite knowledge is when you look at the clock and you really do not know if someone looked at the clock is kind of silly.

I have always considered a silent (non-visible) "countdown" clock in my head to be definite knowledge.

If I was trusted to do it correctly for every three second count and violation that I've ever called in the past forty-five years, then I should be trusted to do it correctly at other times that may need it.

I'm not guessing, I'm not estimating, I'm actually counting.

That's got to a definite knowledge.

[SNIPERBBB]

Hoe the final wording in the books will be interesting.

[Stat-Man]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I have always considered a silent (non-visible) "countdown" clock in my head to be definite knowledge.

If I was trusted to do it correctly for every three second count and violation that I've ever called in the past forty-five years, then I should be trusted to do it correctly at other times that may need it.

I'm not guessing, I'm not estimating, I'm actually counting.

That's got to a definite knowledge.

I probably should have been more careful with my words: I used a visible count this past season when I was aware of timing issues that couldn't be immediately resolved (even if my visible count was done silently ). A silent non-visible count sounds like a good idea in practice, but with the potential to cause more issues than it solves in practice. A visible yet discrete count seems better and I can use that to sell coaches on my using it as definite knowledge of a time adjustment.

I'll be interested to see what my association officers and the state indivisual in charge of basketball have to say about this particular change

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Stat-Man

I probably should have been more careful with my words: I used a visible count this past season when I was aware of timing issues that couldn't be immediately resolved (even if my visible count was done silently ). A silent non-visible count sounds like a good idea in practice, but with the potential to cause more issues than it solves in practice. A visible yet discrete count seems better and I can use that to sell coaches on my using it as definite knowledge of a time adjustment.

I'll be interested to see what my association officers and the state indivisual in charge of basketball have to say about this particular change

This is not an entirely new concept. People have been doing this for some time, but now the rules committee is catching up.

Peace