Rule Changes for Next Season

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by tjones1

Because the article stated the following: "The mechanics for this signal will be extension of the arm with the fist punched."

The mechanic for ALL personal fouls is an extended fist followed by a bird dog and/or preliminary signal.

No reason to think this one should be any different.

Originally Posted by rockyroad

I may be mistaken, but the Fed Mechanics chart shows that ALL fouls are initially signalled by the fist in the air, followed by the appropriate signal for the foul committed...much like the PC foul call, it's whistle/fist first, and then the PC signal.

No, you aren't mistaken.

[tjones1]

True, I was just going by what Mary said exactly.

[johnny1784]

In addition to the point of emphasis on the Proper Procedures for Handling Apparent Concussions that is being emphasized in all NFHS sports rules this year, the Basketball Rules Committee issued four other areas of concern: uniforms, time-outs, intentional fouls and rule/signal enforcement.

[Texas Aggie]

Intentional fouls are going to be a point of emphasis until they either redefine the foul as what the name implies (i.e. intentional) or call it something else. The committee contridicts themselves when they say they want intentional fouls called early and late, and also states that fouling to stop the clock is an acceptable coaching strategy. You can't have it both ways.

[ChuckElias]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

What constitutes an obvious mistake?

The official sees that the clock didn't stop immediately on his whistle. If the clock shows tenths, and I see that the clock clicked an extra tenth, then yeah, I'm putting it back up.

The fact is that I think this rule should only be used when tenths are showing. If the clock doesn't show tenths, then you don't really know where it was when the whistle blew. Was it at 3.7 or 3.1? You don't know unless you can see the tenths. If there are no tenths showing, you're adding a full second, when it's possible that only 2 tenths ran off.

I hope the full rule mentions tenths, like the college rule does.

[Texas Aggie]

In another major change, the exact time observed by the referee
may be placed back on the clock when an obvious mistake is made by the
timer in starting or stopping the clock.
"With this change in Rule 5-10-1, it eliminates the lag
time/reaction time of the clock operator," Struckhoff said. "If the
referee observes the time on the clock when an error occurs, the exact
time will be able to be put back on the clock."

Being focused on the team control mechanic, I missed this the first time. It is an extremely BAD idea for a few reasons. First, while I realize what's written here is not the complete rule, it seems to only apply in cases where the official is actually looking at the clock when he or she blows the whistle. How many times does this actually happen, even late in the game? For me, not very many.

Second, it encourages coaches to nitpik this to their advantage, stressing the officials should put up time even when it isn't warranted. This, along with the tap/try rule with less than half a second could be crucial. The coaches aren't going to care 1)what the rule actually says and 2)what the facts actually are. They are going to have heard this was a rule change and attempt to use it to their advantage. More grief we don't need.

Third, I've witnessed the wrong time being put on the scoreboard, and on many clocks, there isn't a way to set hundreths of a second. Say you blow (and see the clock at) 3.7 left and it stops at 3.3, and the clock can't be reset except to either 3 or 4. What are you going to do?

Finally, while I haven't tested this and would certainly be willing to try and potentially be proven wrong, I have serious doubts that anyone can precisely see when exactly what the clock had when they blew their whistle. Remember, there is SOME time that went off the clock between the time the event that led to the whistle being blown and the actual blowing of the whistle (not to mention the sound waves traveling, but that's likely trivial enough to ignore). Why not correct back to that time, if the official has definite knowledge?

I absolutely hate it when officials start monkeying around with the clock. I know in certain situations it needs to be done, but this rule will cause nothing but trouble.

[Dribble]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

The only problem I see at the table, and this may be minor, is that if I punch my fist toward the table, it may not be picked up as well as it would when given on the floor in direction of the new offenses' basket. But if this is the biggest issue that comes out of rules/mechanics changes this year, we are all in great shape.

I don't think this will be a problem at all. Most people when reporting a PC foul signal with an arm extended out to the side (i.e. in the new direction) following the back of the head mechanic.

I think for the new team control signal at the table, we'll see people reporting with a punch going in the new direction of play vs. toward the table.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by tjones1

True, I was just going by what Mary said exactly.

Not quite...

Originally Posted by tjones1

So for the team control foul, you don't come straight up with a fist to stop the clock... just a whistle and a punch?

She said nothing about a whistle! Just stick your arm out and hope they hear your biceps and triceps quiver as you punch!

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

First, while I realize what's written here is not the complete rule, it seems to only apply in cases where the official is actually looking at the clock when he or she blows the whistle.

Why do think that's the case? It seems more logical to believe that the way the NFHS detailed an official obtaining definite knowledge before still applies. While one case play described the official looking at the clock WHILE blowing the whistle, the others have the official looking at the clock AFTER blowing the whistle.
The way I take this new rule both will apply and the first time that the official sees on the clock will serve as definite knowledge and the correct time.

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

Second, it encourages coaches to nitpik this to their advantage, stressing the officials should put up time even when it isn't warranted. This, along with the tap/try rule with less than half a second could be crucial. The coaches aren't going to care 1)what the rule actually says and 2)what the facts actually are. They are going to have heard this was a rule change and attempt to use it to their advantage. More grief we don't need.

Quite true, but coaches already plead for every little thing that will help their team. Will this make it worse? To some degree yes. But remember that you still have discretionary power. Do you give the coaches everything else for which they beg? In my mind the tradeoff is still a positive one as this rule does give us the ability to restore time to what we saw when less than one second comes off, and as you correctly point out there are certain times, particularly with less than one second remaining, when this makes a huge difference. Last season we did not have this power at all. Used wisely, I believe that this will make the NFHS game better. Used indescriminately, this could indeed make a huge mess. I guess that is why they pay us the big bucks.

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

Third, I've witnessed the wrong time being put on the scoreboard, and on many clocks, there isn't a way to set hundreths of a second. Say you blow (and see the clock at) 3.7 left and it stops at 3.3, and the clock can't be reset except to either 3 or 4. What are you going to do?

Well, how about setting the clock to 4 and having the timer flick it on and off very quickly to run it down to 3.7? I have seen this done and it usually isn't that tough.

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

Finally, while I haven't tested this and would certainly be willing to try and potentially be proven wrong, I have serious doubts that anyone can precisely see when exactly what the clock had when they blew their whistle.

Remember you don't have to see the clock exactly when you blow the whistle. The definite knowledge starts when you DO see the clock. Just as you can't call a foul that you don't observe, you can't reset the clock to anything that you don't see.

[SMEngmann]

I think the new rule regarding the clock will be very helpful just because it allows officials more latitude to be precise. What I don't like is the continuing trend that NFHS has toward being ticky-tack. A rule/point of emphasis should not be put in if consistently enforcing it is overly-officious. The uniform regulations this year are just that, ticky tack. Who cares about sweatbands and headbands, honestly? Doesn't NFHS have more to think about than this? Also, while consolidating the warnings for delay is a good idea, it should reduce the enforcement of the delay rules, because nobody wants to T someone for a bit of a wet spot on the floor after a TO.

The last couple of years, ticky tack stuff has been addressed, like faceguarding, and leaving the court. These are calls that are irritants. The POE on intentional fouls I think makes the rule tougher to enforce properly. Honestly, I'd like to see an NBA style change of rule, changing the intentional foul to a flagrant penalty 1 and the flagrant to a flagrant penalty 2. That, I think, will eliminate the problems associated with strategic fouling. I just wish the committee would stop being ticky-tack.

[Nevadaref]

2006-07 NFHS Basketball Rules Changes
3-5-2 Changed the guidelines for headbands and sweatbands.
3-6 Added that a school logo/mascot is also permitted on the pants, compression shorts, sweatbands and headbands.
5-10-1 The exact time observed by the official may be placed on the clock when a timer’s mistake has occurred.
4-47-4, 10-1-5e New A fourth delay situation was added for water on the court following any time-out.
9-2-11,10-1-5 c, d Changed the procedure for delay warnings to only one warning for any of four delay situations (previously three).
SignalChart Established a new signal for a team-control foul. The arm is extended and the fist is punched.

2006-07 Major Editorial Changes
3-3-6 Clarified that a player who has any amount of blood on his/her uniform shall be directed to leave the game until the situation is corrected.
4-10 Clarified that a closely guarded count is terminated when an offensive player in control of the ball gets his/her head and shoulders past a defensive player.
4-19-14 Clarified that an unsporting foul can be a noncontact technical foul which involves behavior not in accordance with the spirit of fair play.
4-34-1,2 Clarified that a player is one of five team members who are legally in the game at any given time except intermission and that during an intermission, all team members are bench personnel.
5-11-2 Clarified that during a 30-second time-out, no on-court entertainment should occur.

Points of Emphasis
1. Concussions
2. Uniforms
3. Time-outs
4. Intentional Fouls
5. Rule Enforcement/Proper Signal Use


=================================================
Above is what will appear in the front of the Rules book this coming season. (I had it in the nice little chart form, but the forum keeps rejecting the post for being over the 10000 character limit, so I've cut it down to just the text.) I'm posting this as it sheds even more light on the coming rule changes. Particularly notice those editorial revisions. The first one is big change for me. The previous wording said excessive blood on the uniform so I used to allow kids to play with some blood on a jersey. That will no longer be the case.

And no, Tony, a "timer's mistake" isn't defined. But you are certainly astute to ask for a definition of this term as well as "obvious timing mistake."

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

Intentional fouls are going to be a point of emphasis until they either redefine the foul as what the name implies (i.e. intentional) or call it something else. The committee contridicts themselves when they say they want intentional fouls called early and late, and also states that fouling to stop the clock is an acceptable coaching strategy. You can't have it both ways.

Fouling to stop the clock is an excellent coaching strategy. Will continue to be for years to come. The cmte. is saying they want consistency and that the officials understand the game of basketball. The need for "purposely" going for the ball in the early stage of a game is extremely low. If it does happen, the official has to have the squirrels to make the call. I have no problem calling and intentional foul prior to the waning minutes of a game. Have done so about 3 times this season, too.

While I will accept the POE, I doubt it will change my game much. I was also the official that had no problem issuing a technical foul for excessively swinging the elbows, when that was the penalty for that infraction, or for issuing a technical foul for purposely leaving the court for a huge advantage (ie. past the point of preventative officiating).

I have no problems with having it both ways.

[ChuckElias]

4-19-14 Clarified that an unsporting foul can be a noncontact technical foul which involves behavior not in accordance with the spirit of fair play.

What's being clarified by this? Hasn't this always been the case? I don't understand why this needed to be included in this year's changes.

[jeffpea]

[QUOTE=Texas Aggie]Being focused on the team control mechanic, I missed this the first time. It is an extremely BAD idea for a few reasons. First, while I realize what's written here is not the complete rule, it seems to only apply in cases where the official is actually looking at the clock when he or she blows the whistle. How many times does this actually happen, even late in the game? For me, not very many.
QUOTE]

A good non-calling official looks at the game/shot clock immediately after all whistles and when the ball is put in play to make sure the clock stops and starts appropriately. It's not that difficult to train yourself to do this - just a game or two.

[jeffpea]

[QUOTE=Texas Aggie

Second, it encourages coaches to nitpik this to their advantage, stressing the officials should put up time even when it isn't warranted. This, along with the tap/try rule with less than half a second could be crucial. The coaches aren't going to care 1)what the rule actually says and 2)what the facts actually are. They are going to have heard this was a rule change and attempt to use it to their advantage. More grief we don't need.

QUOTE]

What coach doesn't beg and plead for a little "advantage here or there"? This is no different than any other rule or situation. Coaches don't know the exact rule and mis-represent the facts all the time. So what else is new?