Article on Rule Changes....

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by tmp44

Here is what I don't understand about this new rule though....

Sitch--Team A on offense, A2 is passing to A1 as A1 is coming off of a screen in the lane. B1, to avoid the screen, runs OOB by let's say, 3 feet. B1 then comes back in-bounds and:

A) steals the ball as the pass is going to A1, whom he was guarding;

B) A1 receives the pass and B1 continues to guard A1 after returning in-bounds.

What does everyone have in these two sitches?

I've said it before and I'll say it again...

Situation A is not propbable nor much of an advantage. If there is a screen in the lane, then either A1 also went OOB around the screen (which should kill the play first) or B1 took a less effective path.

If A1 had gone on the inbounds side of the screener, B1's best path would have been that direction too. That path can't be legally cut off since any other A player stepping into that path would be guilty of a block if there is contact with B1. If B1 goes OOB, he's chosen a longer path to A1.

[M&M Guy]

Well, I think in the situation B), there WAS an advantage gained by B1 because he was able to go outside the playing court and continue to be in position to guard A1. If he was forced to stay on the court and detour around the screen, A1 would probably be open. So, if B1 goes OOB, then gets back in position to guard A1 - violation. Now, if A1 does get by B1, what advantage does B1 have? If none, then I probably didn't see B1 go OOB.

[johnny1784]

Does any one know when the NFHS 2005-6 rule changes begin? Do we as basketball officials administer these changes beginning with their release date of 4/28/05 or at the start of high school basketball season?

[ChuckElias]

I would guess that would be up to your state's HS association. In MA, we generally use our summer leagues to prepare the players and officials for the new season's rule changes.

[johnny1784]

Originally posted by ChuckElias
I would guess that would be up to your state's HS association. In MA, we generally use our summer leagues to prepare the players and officials for the new season's rule changes.

Ok, thanks. And out here in CA, through the CBOA, we do the same for summer leagues in 1 of 3 associations that I am a member of but I was wondering if the NFHS has some sort of required active date for implementing new rules.

[icallfouls]

We utilize the changes during the summer so that all interested parties start to become familiar with them. My personal feeling is that there is an advantage in using them earlier rather than later, it helps the break in period during the season go quicker and smoother.

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by M&M Guy
Well, I think in the situation B), there WAS an advantage gained by B1 because he was able to go outside the playing court and continue to be in position to guard A1. If he was forced to stay on the court and detour around the screen, A1 would probably be open. So, if B1 goes OOB, then gets back in position to guard A1 - violation. Now, if A1 does get by B1, what advantage does B1 have? If none, then I probably didn't see B1 go OOB.

My contention in B is that B1 had a better choice...the inbounds side of the screen. By going OOB, B1 chose the more difficult and longer path to A1.

[M&M Guy]

I agree, in most cases you're not going to see this. But you have to be prepared for that one time. Maybe there's the one time the defender is trailing A1 by a step or two, and as A1 runs the baseline the post player sets a screen after A1 goes by. If there are other players in the paint area, the only "clear" path might be OOB.

Like you said, in most cases if A1 is inbounds, the best path for B1 will also be inbounds. But don't let a player take advantage of the OOB area if the other team is setting good screens.

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by M&M Guy
I agree, in most cases you're not going to see this. But you have to be prepared for that one time. Maybe there's the one time the defender is trailing A1 by a step or two, and as A1 runs the baseline the post player sets a screen after A1 goes by. If there are other players in the paint area, the only "clear" path might be OOB.

And if B1 is far enough behind to allow A2 to legally step into the path, then B1 is not really part of the play. The basket will already be scored by the time B1 gets back to A1.

[refTN]

I don't have my rulebook on me right now and I was just wondering and I am pretty sure of this but I was just wanting clarification.

If the screener has his foot out of bounds then of course he does not have inbound status therefore if contact occurs with the person getting screened then it is automatically a illegal screen. Right?

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by refTN
I don't have my rulebook on me right now and I was just wondering and I am pretty sure of this but I was just wanting clarification.

If the screener has his foot out of bounds then of course he does not have inbound status therefore if contact occurs with the person getting screened then it is automatically a illegal screen. Right?

No. Being OOB only negates LGP. It doesn't mean automatic foul. It will most often be the case but not automatically.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Camron Rust

No. Being OOB only negates LGP. It doesn't mean automatic foul. It will most often be the case but not automatically.

Can you cite a case when it won't be an automatic foul on a defender who has a foot OOB when contact occurs?

[BktBallRef]

Ah, but the rule change stated the rule was "Clarified that in order for a player to establish legal guarding position, both feet must be touching the "playing court."

Setting a screen has nothing to do with legal guarding position.

Further, just because there's contact, it doesn't mean there's a foul. So I would agree with Camron that it's not automatically a foul.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by BktBallRef
Ah, but the rule change stated the rule was "Clarified that in order for a player to establish legal guarding position, both feet must be touching the "playing court."

Setting a screen has nothing to do with legal guarding position.

Further, just because there's contact, it doesn't mean there's a foul. So I would agree with Camron that it's not automatically a foul.

Of course, the official can no-call it if he didn't think it was a foul. That wasn't what I was talking about. Let me be a little more specific then:

If a foul is called when the defender is standing OOB when the contact occured, is there ever a case when the foul would not on the defender? I'm not talking about flagrant fouls, unsporting acts- or anything like that. Just the normal block/charge call.

That's what I was wondering.

[BktBallRef]

Hold on, I gotta copy and paste your answer somewhere else.