NFHS New Rules are posted

[181174]

4-15-4d; 9-5-2: Changing that a dribble ends when loss of control by the dribbler is caused by the opponent touching, or being touched by, the ball, rather than an intentional batting of the ball.

I am having a brain cramp here, does this mean if the offensive player gains control of the ball again does he/she have their dribble again? or is this a double dribble if they attempt to restart the dribble, sorry the season has been over a month or so now, little cloudy on this.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by 181174

4-15-4d; 9-5-2: Changing that a dribble ends when loss of control by the dribbler is caused by the opponent touching, or being touched by, the ball, rather than an intentional batting of the ball.

I am having a brain cramp here, does this mean if the offensive player gains control of the ball again does he/she have their dribble again? or is this a double dribble if they attempt to restart the dribble, sorry the season has been over a month or so now, little cloudy on this.

Yes, the offensive player can dribble again. Under a strict reading (or at least some strict readings) of the old rule, the player couldn't dribble again if the defensive player was accidentally touched by the ball and the offensive player regained control.

[181174]

Quote:
Originally Posted by 181174
4-42-5: Changing that a throw-in ends when the throw-in pass is "legally" touched by another player

does the 5 second count still end when the player throwing the ball in bounds lets go of it or does this make the count stay on until its touched inbounds by another player?

The rule change won't have any effect on the 5-second count. The count will still end when the throw-in pass is released.
__________________
Okay thanks, so what is the purpose of adding "legally" to this rule on when a throw-in ends. I am not sure what the discussion about a kick ball is about, if the ball is kicked the play is dead and the ball is taken back out of bounds anyway. Just wondering why there needed to be a clarification here?

[Ref in PA]

Originally Posted by 181174

Quote:
Originally Posted by 181174
4-42-5: Changing that a throw-in ends when the throw-in pass is "legally" touched by another player

does the 5 second count still end when the player throwing the ball in bounds lets go of it or does this make the count stay on until its touched inbounds by another player?

The rule change won't have any effect on the 5-second count. The count will still end when the throw-in pass is released.
__________________
Okay thanks, so what is the purpose of adding "legally" to this rule on when a throw-in ends. I am not sure what the discussion about a kick ball is about, if the ball is kicked the play is dead and the ball is taken back out of bounds anyway. Just wondering why there needed to be a clarification here?

If a throw-in was an AP throw-in, the clarifications helps. Suppose A1 is thowing in the ball and B1 kicks the pass. The old wording says the throw-in ends when touched by a player in bounds. Under the old wording there was some debate if the violation by B1 should supercede the touch in bounds and the switching of the arrow. The way it is worded now, if the Team B violates before the end of a throw-in (such as a kicked ball - an illegal touch), Team A retains the AP arrow and the subsequent throw-in by A is for the violation and not an AP throw-in. I hope that makes sense.

[181174]

Thanks, that does make sense. Though if that was the discussion before some people were putting way too much thought into the interpetation of the rule. I would think if you putting the ball in play bc of a held ball and team A has the ball for the throw-in bc of the arrow I wouldn't even think of wondering about the AP bc of a kick ball. I believe officiating is difficult enough without making it even more complicated. Just my opinion.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by 181174

Thanks, that does make sense. Though if that was the discussion before some people were putting way too much thought into the interpetation of the rule. I would think if you putting the ball in play bc of a held ball and team A has the ball for the throw-in bc of the arrow I wouldn't even think of wondering about the AP bc of a kick ball. I believe officiating is difficult enough without making it even more complicated. Just my opinion.

Maybe you'll find this more to your liking then...under the old wording where would you put the ball in play after the kick? At the spot nearest the kick or at the original spot?

[181174]

Good Question. I am not sure, I guess I would have taken it back out of bounds closest to where the kick happened, I would guess that would just be like if the defensive player knocked the ball out of bounds, you would put it back in play where it went out, so when its kicked you take the ball out closest to where the kick ball happened.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally Posted by 181174

Good Question. I am not sure, I guess I would have taken it back out of bounds closest to where the kick happened, I would guess that would just be like if the defensive player knocked the ball out of bounds, you would put it back in play where it went out, so when its kicked you take the ball out closest to where the kick ball happened.

Old rule - correct.
New rule - (by my reading) you'll go back to the original throw-in spot, as the throw-in hasn't ended.

[socalreff]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

Maybe you'll find this more to your liking then...under the old wording where would you put the ball in play after the kick? At the spot nearest the kick or at the original spot?

We had this discussion at a rules discussion before the season when we were required to take the new NCAA test. To me it seemed very simple. If the ball is kicked, the ensuing throw-in is awarded because of a violation, so it goes to the nearest spot of the violation. The offense would retain the arrow(I know with the new clarification -- not rule change-- it's easy now.)
I looked at it this way: If the offense violates on an AP throw-in, they lose the ball and the arrow. So why would the defense be rewarded with the arrow when they violate on a throw-in? This is not a rule change, even according to Struckoff. It is just a clarification for the the many officials who lacked the common sense necessary to interpret the rule. The NCAA rule on a throw-in states "legally touched" and there were still plenty of excellent NCAA officials who said they would switch the arrow in their game.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by socalreff

The NCAA rule on a throw-in states "legally touched" and there were still plenty of excellent NCAA officials who said they would switch the arrow in their game.

Socal, legally touched means exactly that.

A kick - in basketball - is not a legal touch.

btw, your response to Dexter makes no sense.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally Posted by socalreff

This is not a rule change, even according to Struckoff. It is just a clarification for the the many officials who lacked the common sense necessary to interpret the rule.

I think it's a pretty damn big rule change. Perhaps had the editor written the rule more clearly, it wouldn't have been so 'confusing' to all of us officials out here.