NFHS Annual Questions

[Rich]

Was at an association meeting Monday night and we went through the NFHS's annual survey on rules/rule changes/potential rule changes.

Some of the questions (all these from memory, so I may miss some):

-Has eliminating 2 players from the FT line cleaned up play?

Personally, I don't think it has done much of anything. Not allowing the rebounders to leave until the release has cleaned up play. Actually, it eliminated the requirement that the officials work hard to officiate the positioning they used to do, but that's another argument.

-Should they leave things the way it is or go to having the low spot empty next season (like NCAAW)?

No real opinion from me, although I would think that the defense would probably get even more rebounds.

-Should the NFHS go to 16-minute halves instead of 8-minute quarters?

There was loud opposition to this from the group. I don't understand why. Two fewer last second shots sounds like a good thing to me.

-Should the NFHS eliminate the 5-second closely guarded rule while dribbling?

Are they trying to turn this into NCAAW or what? I think this only works with a shot clock. Oh, the next question:

-Should the NFHS allow shot clocks by state association adoption?

I think these probably WERE put together for a reason. I'd like to go one step further and eliminate the 10-second backcourt violation if we have a shot clock, but I can't imagine that happening.

Actually, one of my friends at the meeting made an astute observation -- just one more clueless person on the table to worry about

There were also questions about taunting, pregame rituals distracting opponents, and other sportsmanship questions.

Oh, and they asked us how we feel about the kicked ball "approved" signal. Does anyone else think that they would've been much better off just slipping the signal onto the chart without comment? I mean, who DIDN'T use a kick signal prior to this season?

[garote]

Here's my two cents:

1. I think it has been cleaned up a little more on the FT lanes. I've noticed that I haven't had nearly as many rebounding fouls as before.

2. I would like to see the adoption of the NCAAW on FT's. I think it can only help even more.

3. NO!!! 16 min halves I see the point of less last second shots but usually it is only a problem in the 4th with the game tied. This year I've only had 3 games out of 60 decided by the last second bucket this year. I also think at this level its a good break to refocus the kids and a good time for more teaching. (I know probably a pipe dream).

4. YES!!!! YES!!! YES!!!! Get rid of the five second count on the dribble. Yes I agree reward good defense but this isn't the way to do it.

5. I'm undecided on the shot clock. I see good and bad. Have to do more thinking on the subject.

[Larks]

How about....

Should NF go to the college mechanic where you report and stay table side in 3-man? I think so. You have the stones to make the call, have the stones to explain what you had if you need to.

I agree you cant go to the womens style 5 seconds w/o a shot clock. I agree HS is not ready for shot clock. Heck, sometimes for the lower level games, you are lucky to get a qualified person to even run the clock let alone understand / run the shot clock.

16 min halves would shorten the length of games in my opinion. I'm guessing 5-10 min a game? Would help get that varsity game on time without taking real game time away from the players.

My only thought about the free throw deal is that in 2-man, the trail has to watch his guys in the lane, the shooter and the 3 other guys outside the 3pt. line. Memo to NF we can't realistically do this in two man. Now, I dont know how big of a deal this is but it's out there.

Larks

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Larks
How about....

16 min halves would shorten the length of games in my opinion. I'm guessing 5-10 min a game? Would help get that varsity game on time without taking real game time away from the players.

By eliminating two 1 minute periods you save 10 minutes a game? Not sure I see how that happens. But I do agree that going to 16 minute halves would be a good idea.

And I agree with you on the calling official going to the table for 3 man. Its a great system, IMO.

[Larks]

End of qtr before timer starts...30 sec - a min
break - 1 min
Break huddle and getting ready...30 sec - a min

2-3 min x 2 = 5-6 min.

Ok, 10 min is a stretch...but 5 min...Easy. Multiply this by the FR / JV double header ahead of the varsity game and you save at least 10 min.

Of course, the only folks that care about this are usually just the varsity refs!

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Larks
End of qtr before timer starts...30 sec - a min
break - 1 min
Break huddle and getting ready...30 sec - a min

2-3 min x 2 = 5-6 min.

Ok, 10 min is a stretch...but 5 min...Easy. Multiply this by the FR / JV double header ahead of the varsity game and you save at least 10 min.

Of course, the only folks that care about this are usually just the varsity refs!

You forgot to account for the extra real time that is used as the intensity for the last 30 seconds of the 1st and 3rd quarters goes way up, especially in a close game. Vie-ing (wow, spelling!?!?!) for that last basket can really stretch out the last 30 seconds or so. At least, in JV girls it can.

[Rich]

Originally posted by Dan_ref

By eliminating two 1 minute periods you save 10 minutes a game? Not sure I see how that happens. But I do agree that going to 16 minute halves would be a good idea.

And I agree with you on the calling official going to the table for 3 man. Its a great system, IMO.

If they go to 16 minute halves, I would think they would add another timeout per team. I guess the person to ask would be Chuck -- do they get more in MA than the 5 the FED gives each team?

[PAULK1]

2 changes I would like to see

1. Go to team control fouls like NCAA.(this one might get in)

2. eliminate coaches calling TO ( this one will not)

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by Rich Fronheiser
Has eliminating 2 players from the FT line cleaned up play?

It has at least made it easier to officiate. Not sure it cleaned up much of anything. The first two players on the side of the lane, still cause contact with each other. But I do not see that as a bad thing.

Originally posted by Rich Fronheiser
-Should they leave things the way it is or go to having the low spot empty next season (like NCAAW)?

Leave it the way it is. You are just going to force the defender to push more in my opinion. More rebounding fouls it will cause if you ask me.

Originally posted by Rich Fronheiser
-Should the NFHS go to 16-minute halves instead of 8-minute quarters?

Yes!!! I think the game would have a better flow. And if they are worried about taking away an opportuntiy to teach the kids, add another full timeout. The current system only creates more possiblity for stress with a last second shot for the players, coaches and officials.

Originally posted by Rich Fronheiser
-Should the NFHS eliminate the 5-second closely guarded rule while dribbling?

No. This is not college women's basketball. These players will hold the ball dribbling around and you will have more possiblities for fouls to be called. Keep this the way it is. That is why the NCAA Men's got rid of that rule.

Originally posted by Rich Fronheiser
-Should the NFHS allow shot clocks by state association adoption?

No. I really think you will cause more problems. We have a hard enough time trying to get folks that know how to run the clock the way it is, now we are going to add another fool to run the shot clock and screw that up too?

Originally posted by Rich Fronheiser
Actually, one of my friends at the meeting made an astute observation -- just one more clueless person on the table to worry about

I feel the same way.

Originally posted by Rich Fronheiser
There were also questions about taunting, pregame rituals distracting opponents, and other sportsmanship questions.

Oh, and they asked us how we feel about the kicked ball "approved" signal. Does anyone else think that they would've been much better off just slipping the signal onto the chart without comment? I mean, who DIDN'T use a kick signal prior to this season?

Not only do I like the fact that this is an approved mechanic, but they should allow us to use some other mechanics that are widely used. I still point to the other direction of the court on fouls that are committed by the offense or the team in control. Not only does this explain what I have, no one misunderstands this mechanic. I go thru the drill doing all the other mechanics, then I point to the other end of the floor. This has become a habit, and no one is confused by it. I have not even been told to stop doing it by IHSA officials. Maybe that will happen, but not yet. I think the NF has to open their thinking and start being more descriptive on their signals.

Peace

[Rich]

Not only do I like the fact that this is an approved mechanic, but they should allow us to use some other mechanics that are widely used. I still point to the other direction of the court on fouls that are committed by the offense or the team in control. Not only does this explain what I have, no one misunderstands this mechanic. I go thru the drill doing all the other mechanics, then I point to the other end of the floor. This has become a habit, and no one is confused by it. I have not even been told to stop doing it by IHSA officials. Maybe that will happen, but not yet. I think the NF has to open their thinking and start being more descriptive on their signals.

Peace

I "ship" every foul that goes the other direction, too. It tells my partners and everyone else immediately what we have.

I went to a playoff game this week and watched a good friend work. 2-officials in our little neck of the woods. Both used college mechanics on all the out of bounds calls. I thought it looked great -- DECISIVE. No delay while the hand went up. I'll never understand why the FED and why local associations make such a huge deal about this. My theory is that it is all about power.

--Rich

[jlope1]

My 2 cents worth.
I think the two less players in the lane during FT's has made it better at least a little bit. What I would like to see is being able to enter the lane upon the release. It would help make things easier for us.

In CA, we do have a shot clock. I cant imagine games without one.

16 minute halves would be a good idea if the each team got an extra time out per game. Otherwise it should stay the way it is.

Going table side on 3 person mechanics is a good idea. Better to be in line with what is done at the college level.

[BoomerSooner]

Well here's my position on things....

With 2 less players on the lane you haven't really cleaned things up a whole lot (outside of having 2 less players to commit fouls, everybody else is still going hard), but it does clear the picture up in that sight lines are a little better. Just a little easier to officials.

As for the positioning of the players, I say leave them alone. Maybe nostalgia speaking here, may be my dislike of change, may be alot of things speaking, but I don't like it for some reason. Probably the thought of increased fouls is the biggest deterrent for me.

16 min halves vs 8 minute quarter - I don't care to change things. Let the kids play 8 min quarters. Holding for that last shot is strategy, change to halves you lose 2 strategic plays per game. I also agree that it takes 2 periods of coaching away (adding 2 TO's per game, 1 for each team, doesn't completely balance this in my mind). Also some of nostalgia and such in this one.

5 second closely guarded count must stay in place - dribling and holding. Eliminating it would penalize good defense. Even moderate ball handlers can keep the ball from a good defender and draw a foul if his only goal is to run clock. The rule as it is forces action on the part of the offense, which is typically the side that should be moving the game along.

Shot clock @ High school level = bad. It might speed the game up and add a little strategy late in games, but what about proper training for operators. I don't think you would get it at the HS level. Also think of the cost of adding the equipment. Large schools could handle it, but smaller schools (especially here in Oklahoma, where the top story on the news every night seems to be how can we make more money for public schools and where there was talk of charging players a fee to sign up for public school athletic teams) I don't think it would fly.

As for the kick ball approved signal, I've got no problems with it. Sure alot of us were using it improperly before, but now its legitimate. If they didn't approve it, then any official that wanted to use the grizzly bear over-the-back signal or the travel signal for a throw in violation couldn't really be repremanded by anyone that was using the, at the time, unapproved kick signal. Its kinda hard to say I can use the unapproved kick signal, but you can't use . Now this is a moot point, because the kick signal is gravy.

[missinglink]

[Great synopsis and thought provoking. My 2C on a few:


Some of the questions (all these from memory, so I may miss some):

-Has eliminating 2 players from the FT line cleaned up play?

I would like to keep it with the current rule. Measuring how well this year's change has cleaned up play is hard but the rule change definitely made FT easier to officiate and perhaps therefore better for fans and players. Low Block empty? Nope. For HS girls we wouldn't notice, but for men we will be calling a lot of holding and pushing on or for the number two position as they try to go around the block position to occupy that HUGE seemingly empty space. Keeping the current line up is the way to go.


-Should the NFHS go to 16-minute halves instead of 8-minute quarters?
Keep it the way it is: High school coaches need all SEVEN of their timeouts, although I am always amazed at the number that aren't used.

-Should the NFHS eliminate the 5-second closely guarded rule while dribbling?
Keep it. Elimination is one more step of ignoring or not rewarding great defense. If they are going to change this area, redefining or eliminating the 6 foot definition makes more sense. Officials' judgment should be used for determining when a player is closely guarded.

[ShadowStripes]

1. New FT rules? Can't detect any real difference. I think the women's rule stinks as it basically prevents the defense from rebounding at all unless the ball comes off long or the defender sweeps around the outside to steal the position. I still think players should be allowed to leave on the release anyway. The NFHS bailed out bad officiating by adding this rule.

2. Quarters vs. halves? Stick with the quarters. I think varsity games should be 10 minute quarters instead of 8. They're high school kids - they can handle it.

3. Shot clocks? Yes, but the drawback will be having good table staff and ready officials.

[TigerBball]

A coach's perspective.

With all the TV coverage NCAA games get these days, I would think most games are given the TV time-outs every 4 min. You won't get that in a high school game. The Quarter breaks give both teams a chance to rest, regroup, get a drink, and plan the next quarter. For me, teaching 7th grade, it gives me a great spot to sub players. Since I play all my guys, I can divide the quarters in half and make my subs. Otherwise I would have to plan on using a TO to get the same timing and ability to talk to the new group as they go in.

As far as a shot clock, I have never understood this. A shot clock takes away a valuable strategy. Why is it such a problem to allow a team to run their offense for 50 seconds or 2 minutes. A shot clock will create more rushed ill-advised shots at the high school level.

Personally, I think the shot clock was put in so that great strategist like Dean Smith and Bobby Knight could not put games away with thier ball control techniques. The shot clock places more value on an athlete, and less value on a skilled player.