Don't the upcoming year's rule changes come out about this time of year. Anyone know when they will be released by the NFHS? I didn't see anything on their website.

The basketball rules committee meets on April 18.

Last year's changes were announce April 28.

I recall that twice in the past 6 years that I first heard of the new Fed rules in early May.

Any predictions?????

I predict no gray shirts or shot clock. I hope they make the "playing oob" a violation instead of a technical foul. I hope they add some clarification to the term path and to closely guarded.

Say what?

^ What he said.

He must of called a lot of Ts....

I've only seen it called once (it was me) and heard of it called twice. The only reason I called it was that the kid stepped back inbounds after running the length of the baseline oob, caught the ball and made the shot. I couldn't get away with a violation (he was clearly back inbounds) so I had to go with the T. The coach understood after my explanation. Luckily it was in a weekend middle school tournament and not in a HS game. I still think it should be a T, not a violation.

He said "I...HOPE...THEY...MAKE...THE..."PLAYING OOB"...A...VIOLATION...INSTEAD...OF...A...TECHNICA L...FOUL"

Ok...where does 9-2-12 fit in? "No teammate of the thrower shall be out of bounds after a designated-spot throw-in begins"

I interpret that to mean if a teammate of the thrower goes out of bounds, it's a throw-in violation. Is that the correct interpretation?

Are we to call a violation or a technical?

That's correct. It's a violation for a seconf player to be OOB when his team's thrower is already OOB with the ball.

I had a partner call it a violation, no one knew the difference. :D Then afterwards his teammate told him he couldn't do that. They player said "I know."

I would prefer the violation better.

He said "I...HOPE...THEY...MAKE...THE..."PLAYING OOB"...A...VIOLATION...INSTEAD...OF...A...TECHNICA L...FOUL" [/B][/QUOTE]
__________________________________________________ _________
OK Dan.. I know you said it louder. Now can you say it a little slower.

__________________________________________________ _________
I've seen it called once and it was a bad call, in fact the call was ridiculous. It didn't even fit the situation it is designed to prevent. It was a bad T and I ended up having to have a fan ejected because he wouldn't get off my partner's back. I hope they change this to a violation.

LOL, You quoted it wrong! :D I didn't say that!

I hear their wanting to change the uniform.....


Striped shirt, instead of black pants, going with the fishnets. :)

[Edited by brandan89 on Apr 9th, 2005 at 07:31 PM]

You mean without shorts!?!?!? :rolleyes:

Hmmm... Lets hope they require them. :)

__________________________________________________ _________

Padgett,
You scare me some days, man -- you really do! (LOL)
RR

Is this true only on a designated throw-in and not true after a made basket? I'm picturing the OOB play where A1 is taking it out against pressure, A2 runs out of bounds where A1 then passes it to him and A1 then goes inbounds to receive the pass.

Is this only a violation if its on a designated throw-in?

You are correct. The restriction is only applicable on a designated spot throwin.

OK, then...my question is...if we see a teammate of the thrower run out of bounds, for example, to get behind a screen, ...why aren't we calling a violation, and make giving the technical a moot point?

The only potential rule change that I've heard of (from a committee member)and apparently it is getting very serious consideration is expanding the high school coaching box to match the college coaching box (i.e. end line to 28 foot line). Other than that, nothing dramatic is being discussed.

Call the violation on a spot throw-in. Otherwise, for non throw-in situations, call the T if a player goes OOB and gains an unfair advantage.

Good to know.

Seems kind of pointless to me. I think I've seen a coach out of his box on the baseline end maybe once in the last couple of years. It's the other end that coaches seem to want expanded.

You may be right over all, but the few times I've had a coach down near the baseline, it's been to rag on my partner or me. To not be able to remind him or her of the box will just increase the wear and tear.

That was my experience too. If they seriously want to look at improving the coaching box rule, require an electric fence around the existing box. :D

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Back In The Saddle
[B][QUOTE]Originally posted by rainmaker

Quote:

Originally posted by Back In The Saddle Quote: Originally posted by walter You may be right over all, but the few times I've had a coach down near the baseline, it's been to rag on my partner or me. To not be able to remind him or her of the box will just increase the wear and tear. That was my experience too. If they seriously want to look at improving the coaching box rule, require an electric fence around the existing box. :D

__________________________________________________ _________

How about a little of that razor aharp wire like they use in prisons?

My reply is old. I would think you are writing about Rule 10-3-3, a player technical is given when leaving the court for an unauthorized reason. You do not give a warning or a violation per the 2004-5 points of emphasis where all players must play within the confines of the playing court (Rules Book, pg.70, 3.a). But most of the replies on this original topic seem to be about Rule 4-41-6 which would be a violation only.

thank you johnny 1784
 

i called this because it was just like the poe and the case book...was told that not many officals call this because the penalty is to severe...would like to see this as a violation

Re: thank you johnny 1784
 

Which was my original point. I know of only three officials in my area who made this call this year. The penalty is way too severe for the offense. It needs to be made a violation rather than a technical foul. Hopefully the rules committee has received much feedback on this. Of course, with so few officials calling it, the committee could be deceived into thinking that no news is good news.

Electric fence? How about the invisible fence with the dog collar? Of course, it would have to be disabled during timeouts.

And wouldn't it be a shame if one timeout somebody forgot to turn it off? :eek: :D

Always include the timer & scorer in your pre-game routine. ;)