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 With changes last year that modified the procedures when addressing faking being fouled, it was no longer applicable.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.

[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 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

[BillyMac]

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.

We've been debating on what to call these eight "magic spots" over the past two years.

(Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. came up with a particularly terrible suggestion, "Designated Spot Throw-in Designated Throw-in Spot.)

In doing some research on this new rule, I came across this terminology:

"Pre-Marked Designated Throwin Spots".

Perfect!

I like it, it's a great way to differentiate these eight spots from other designated throwin spots (like for out of blonds throwins).

[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.

[Raymond]

Then they need to change the name of the eight spots. Since an OOB throw-in is a designated spot throw-in, I guarantee officials are going to confuse it with a throw-in from a "designated spot" marking.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Then they need to change the name of the eight spots. Since an OOB throw-in is a designated spot throw-in, I guarantee officials are going to confuse it with a throw-in from a "designated spot" marking.

I suggest, “Pre-Marked Designated Throwin Spots”.

SNIPERBBB suggests, “Marked Spots".

Of course, anytime we refer to them we can always describe them as, “one of the eight marked designated spots”.

Next year, these eight spots (or four spots) will have been around for three years and the NFHS is still trying to deal with a few complexities.

95% (probably more) of the time it's pretty simple. Out of bounds goes to a designated spot nearest the out of bounds violation. Any other violation or foul goes to the nearest of one of the eight marked designated spots.

It's the other 5% (probably less) of the time that some officials, and apparently the NFHS, struggle with (most are throwin violations).

Get one of these "complex" situations wrong in the first period of a game and nobody will know, care, or remember.

But get one of these "complex" situations wrong (and it possibly affects the outcome) in the last seconds of a late season game and it will be all over the front page, above the fold, of the local newspaper's sports section.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Then they need to change the name of the eight spots. Since an OOB throw-in is a designated spot throw-in, I guarantee officials are going to confuse it with a throw-in from a "designated spot" marking.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

Absolutely correct! The unclear language used by the NFHS is going to cause confusion.

I like “marked throw-in spot” vs designated-spot throw-in.

I’m going to suggest this to the Nevada representative currently on the NFHS rules committee.