NFHS New Rules are posted
 

Follow this link to see the new rules listing.

http://www.nfhs.org/web/2007/04/2007..._rules_ch.aspx

What?!? The "spread arms" signal for non-closely-guarded is back?

Sigh...I can already tell my arms will be tired this season. And I'm not even flying in from anywhere...

I like the one about the replaced player only having 20 seconds now, with a buzzer at 15 seconds till.
So it will now go like this...
"start the clock..."
"what time is it?"
BUZZZZZZZ!!!!
"WHAT??"
BUZZZZZZZ!!!!
Seems a little pointless to buzz 5 seconds after you start it, IMO.

And they have finally added a signal that a lot of people have been doing for years (including myself) the "if you were just 2 feet closer you would be getting the chop, signal"

That signal has been kind of a pet peeve of mine. If the player is closely guarded, I have a count. If the player is not close enough, there's no count. Pretty simple.

I can see this happening - A1 dribbles from the back court, I've got my 10-sec. count going. They cross the center line, I put my arm down, and B comes over to guard, but not close enough, so I hold up both arms. B steps closer, so I start a 5-sec. count. A1 starts dribbling, so I start another count with my other arm. When A1 backs up, I hold out both arms. Then B1 gets closer, so I start another count. A1 flips a pass to A2, who isn't being closely guarded, so I hold out both arms. Well, until B2 comes over to guard, then I start a count. Then B2 starts to dribble away, so I hold out both arms again... My arms are already tired and this is only in the first minute of the game!

This seems rather significant:
4-42-5: Changing that a throw-in ends when the throw-in pass is "legally" touched by another player.

It seems to me it will have ramifications for the arrow. Right?

Good ramifications, IMHO.

AP throw-in. A1 releases the throw-in pass, which is immediately kicked by B1. Team A is awarded a throw-in for the violation and the arrow is not switched.

I'm not a fan. :)

Gee, can we get the foul-tip signal, too? I'm not a fan of signals for no-calls.
Do we get to run down the court with our arms out? Maybe we can lift a leg and look like the Karate Kid.

I'm going back to my room and practice "wax on, wax off".

Maybe I can build up my arm strength for next season. :eek:

Agreed. This is what several of us have been asserting for a couple years with regard to this situation...when the rule was ambiguous. Now there is no debate....a kick on the throwin occurs before the throwin ends.

I'll give them credit for clarity here. I guess.

I am going to have to disagree with you (I do not expect you to get mad about it like some people). I think this is a good signal. This is one of those signals that can give information. It tells everyone you are not counting for a specific reason. Many times you may not count, but they are still calling for a count. This signal will tell everyone exactly why. Usually this would take place on a one on one situation where the players are up top and the defender cannot decide if he wants to guard the player or stand back. I think it adds to information. When you stop a count you could be stopping it for many reasons. It is not a signal you have to use or use at all. I think just like the kicking signal, it gives information.

Peace

My thoughts exactly Rut!

What?!? Are you disagreeing with me?!? :mad:

Never mind. :D

Actually, on one level, I agree with you - it does convey information. And, if it will now be an approved signal, I will probably start using it. My pet peeve is officials using unapproved signals when they didn't need to. If I was counting, it was a closely-guarded situation. If I wasn't counting, it wasn't. I didn't think it was necessary to not count, and give a signal as well. It was redundant. It was redundant. Get what I mean? Get what I mean?

You got a problem with it, wanna fight about it? (That is for my Family Guy friends. :D)

I only used the signal during college games. I would only use it a handful of times an entire season. I just think the signal is best used during specific situations and should be used sparingly.

Peace

My kids watch that all the time. The few times I've seen it, it loks pretty funny.

I agree.

I agree.

You let your kids watch that show? :D I would find it hard for most kids to completely understand. The references on that show are often very adult from the standpoint that you have to be older to understand the pop culture reference.

You are not going to beat me up now are you? :D

Peace

Interesting changes...I agree I like the new mechanic as it gives information if used properly.

They understand most of it. I agree there's a few things that go over their head. It's not much different than when I was a kid, Rocky and Bullwinkle was a favorite of mine. It wasn't until much later did I see some of the adult references.

Naw, I'll just slap you silly. :D

You know I was not afraid of the rap music or the hood someone came from, but now I am very afraid. :D

Peace

Before we know it high school rules will be the same as college....

Some thoughts:
1. All warning horns are now sounded 15 seconds prior to the end of the timed interval.
2. The wording change on an opponent "touching" a dribble codifies what we have previously allowed.
3. The legal touching to end a throw-in is going to have further ramifications. We'll have to wait and see if the timing rules are also going to be changed so that the clock starts when a throw-in is legally touched. Right now it starts when the ball is simply touched.
4. Whether we think that the adding of the NOT closely-guarded signal is good or bad, we can at least stop nitpicking its use by NFHS officials.
5. Good editorial clarifications: hard items in the hair are prohibited, screener must stay vertical and with feet shoulder width apart, adding deceitfully to the delaying returning after being legally OOB.
6. The Fashion Police strike again as "Uniforms" is the #1 POE.

Yup, good to know that we have to be the fashion police as a POE. Isn't there more important stuff for us to worry about?

NFHS is known for following college by a year or two.

So now we have a player foul out and there will be a horn FIVE SECONDS after we start the clock? Wow.

Yeah - seems a bit much to me. The whole point of a horn used to be "you have only a small fraction of your allotted time remaining."

That said - the first coach who "loses track" of time is going to get pissed and probably earn himself a second T along with a trip to the locker room. After that, every coach will be rushing someone to the table at the first horn.

Actually, I think that the change will make things simpler for the coaches. We can now tell them that once a warning horn sounds, they have 15 seconds to get their players whereever they are required to be.

I envision this.
A situation arises in which a timed interval is needed and the official instructs the timer to start the clock. Now we wait around until...

BUZZ!!!

Coach: "What was that for?"

Official: "It means you've got fifteen seconds, coach."

Coach: "Ok."

I would not go that far. None of the new rules that I can tell this year have anything to do with the college game. The only thing added was a signal, which is not really a rule. I would not be surprised if some areas choose not to use the signal which is completely their right to do so.

Also understand that the NF tries to keep things as simple as possible when they create or change rules. Even when they adopt a college rule, the NF does not usually take on the entire rule. For example the Team Control Foul that was adopted 2 years ago did not take on all facets of the rule and still is not identical to how the college rule reads. Even POI is not the same as the NCAA Rule. They try to keep things simple so the rookie official to the 50 year veteran can handle the understanding. Not that it always works, but that appears to be their goal.

Peace

I have talked about this before. Illinois about 4 years ago used a NF Experimental Rule by saying that substitutions had to be done immediately. When this rule was first applied I thought we would have many Ts and problems because coaches would try to test officials. I was absolutely wrong on my first impression. It was amazing when a player would foul out, before the calling official would report the foul to the table, the coaches would have subs at the table or on their way to the table when a foul was called. Now if coaches could adapt having to make a substitution "immediately" as the language was used, they can adapt to this. I am still trying to figure out why they have not gone to the "immediately" language if the objective is to move the game along. Many officials here loved the rule because coached did not seem to dare test officials and the language of that rule. I think coaches can adjust to a horn 5 seconds into the clock being started.

Peace

It may be a situation where you inform the coach he has 5 seconds to choose a sub once the clock starts on this particular disqualification. You then walk slowly to the reporting area and say "S-T-A-R-T T-H-E C-L-O-C-K."

Is the spread eagle mandatory all the time, or just when you hear a chirp?

What situation are you thinking of?:confused:

I can't think of any reason not to use whatever the procedure the new rule sets out. I'm with Jeff. It's the coach's job to adjust and get a sub at the table before 20 seconds are up.

The adjustments made with the warning horns seems ridiculous to me. Way too much time spent in that area. I say there are bigger fish to fry in the rules then this one.

Spreading the arms is good because when I did it before, I was chastised for using college mechanics in a HS game, even though no harm was done and it conveyed information, it was still viewed as wrong. Now, it is apart of the mechanic, this is a very good thing. Another thing, in college, I seldom used this mechanic so my bet is it will be the same at a HS game.

So, the way I read your post...you knowingly use a college-only mechanic in HS games and then say you seldom use it in college games? Do you institute a shot clock at your HS games too?

The general theme of many of the rules was to become like college rules/mechanics -- warning horn on 30 sec. TOs to 15, spread eagle mechanic. Does anyone thing that what is posted on the NFHS site, re: the warning sound for subs at 5 after a DQ is a typo?

The college rule is a horn at 15 and 20 -- Rule 4-17-5 -- the way the new rules seem, it would seem to me that the NF would want this to be in effect, not a horn at 5 and 20.

Thoughts?

I'm going to start using signals to indicate why I'm not calling every possible call. I've always wanted to look like a mime - NOT!!!!! :eek:

No, I think that the NFHS did this on purpose. Now all warning horns are sounded 15 seconds prior to the end of the interval. Go take a look at my previous post in this thread.

Poe
 

I was looking at the new rules, but was wondering what the POE's were for the upcoming season. I did notice that there were 4 POE's but there was no statement elaborating on them. Does anybody know what the POE's are?

The POEs are at the bottom of the link. They do not elaborate on them at this time. They just tell you what they are.

Peace

I do implement the shot clock in hs games.... of course I'm in CA. :)

I think this is the best thing and it will keep coach and players from yelling 5 secons Ref!!!!!

Do you really think that will stop because of a new hand signal? You're not going to stand there with your arms out the whole time a dribbler is not being defended, are you? Coaches will still yell if they think you should be counting. And officials will still have their own interpretation of how close a defender needs to be in order to start a count. This new signal isn't going to change much of the complaining.

I have used that mechanic in high school for the last couple of years and I think its a great non verbal communication tool, especially for the coaches. Trust me it works.

:(


.

Smitty,

It is very possible his state allowed this mechanic to be use. Mechanics are not something the NF can mandate (or try to mandate) across the board. Rules are a different issue.

Secondly it is never going to completely stop coaches from complaining. Nothing will ever stop coaches from doing that. But giving a signal will greatly help as did the Team Control Foul signal did. Before the TC foul, we had to explain why were not shooting FTs. Now the coaches see the signal and understand the concept without a word.

Peace

Fair enough. I wonder if he'll say whether that's the case.

I completely agree with that statement. I hope it causes coaches to yell at their players to get closer to get the count back on instead of yelling at us that we should keep the count going.

I confess that I, too, have used the signal in HS games -- not as a matter of course, but in response to a coach asking me to count.

With no signal, the coach doesn't know if you're blind or have poor judgment. With, the signal, he'll know what to complain about. ;)

You must work all public school games. :rolleyes:

Quote:
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">Originally Posted by tmp44
Does anyone thing that what is posted on the NFHS site, re: the warning sound for subs at 5 after a DQ is a typo?
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

From the NFHS press release of May 7, 2007:

"The final revision approved by the committee was changing the warning horn for a 30-second time-out to be sounded with 15 seconds remaining. This change makes all warning horns uniform for intermissions, time-outs and the disqualified player interval."

:D

Nope, I do private school as well!

Or as Borat would say "I've always wanted to NOT!!!!! look like a mime".

Just wondering..... what states other than ours use the shot clock for girls and boys? We use college rules governing the shot clock except for the newer kicked ball violation -- in hs it is still reset on any kicked ball.

No shot clock in VA.

There are only SEVEN states that use a shot clock in either girls or boys HS play.

Some of the New England prep schools use it.

Regular leagues in CT don't.

See corrections above.

Also, what's with not listing the states? Is this a Jeopardy! clue??

In NY, Boys use NFHS with a shot clock.

Girls use NCAA W

I can't believe that private school students do not correctly pronounce "seconds". ;)

I've listed them on this forum before and you know that. :) BTW the statement that SEVEN states currently use a shot clock in HS is the official word from the NFHS office.

But just for you...
CA (both), MA (both), NY (both), MD (girls), WA (girls), ND (both, Class A only), [I'm missing one more at the moment. I'll look it up and edit this.] and some private school leagues in various areas such as VA (girls) and a strange multi-state monstrosity called the New England Preparatory School Athletic Council. :D

You are mistaken. You many think that you use the NCAA rules for the shot clock in CA HS games, but in truth your official policy is to employ the rules modifications published in the CBOA manual which were written by Bill White.

Can you explain why they do not use NCAA Rules? What are the differences?

Peace

Actually, there is a shot clock in VA on the girls side of the Independent School League (Northern VA, DC & MD).

Send your opinions/complaints to:

www.nfhs.org.

MEDIA CONTACTS: Bruce Howard or John Gillis, 317-972-6900

National Federation of State High School Associations

PO Box 690, Indianapolis, Indiana 46206

[email protected] or [email protected]

I am not mistaken. Next time you can use my whole quote..... we do use the NCAA rules regarding the shot clock except for the kicked ball which only became different when the NCAA changed the rule a couple years ago. And there was talk even at that time that the kicked ball rule would change for the high school level as well. As late as a month before the season it was to be implemented until we received a directive from Dr. White that CIF would keep the kick rule as it was. Dr. White told me he took the rules straight from the NCAA. If you can find anything in the CBOA manual that shows it being any different from NCAA, let me know. Directly off page 22 in the handbook --
"The rules governing the shot clock for high school basketball are the same as those used in NCAA Men and Womens games with one exception: a kicked ball results in a full reset of the shot clock."

Do not worry. It is not the first time he comes out all big and bold only to be wrong. That is why I asked a follow-up question. I trust people that actually work in that state than someone that only reads about what goes on in that state.

Peace

"The rules governing the shot clock for high school basketball are the same as those used in NCAA Men and Womens games with one exception: a kicked ball results in a full reset of the shot clock."

Various reasons led to the use of the shot clock. Speed of play, as well as, preparation for the next level are a couple. Also, it helps officials tremendously in clock awareness and game management going into the college ranks. At most college camps around the country, there is no shot clock. It's definitely one of the things that's hard to tell at camp for assignors whether an official is a good clock manager. For us, it's ingrained in us from freshmen level all the way up.

I was not responding to you. I was asking this question of the person whose quote was also in the post. Once again, I trust the person that lives in the particular state to know more than someone that does not. Personally I have very little opinion about the shot clock at the HS level. If they ever go to it where I live, I would be OK with it. If they never changed the rule, I would be OK with that too.

Peace

Thanks. Do you see situations during games where you wish there was one? I remember a few times where a team stalled because they felt they couldn't keep up. Also, I saw teams stall just because they didn't like their opponent -- one time a team threw the ball in to start the quarter and held for the last shot:( . Talk about trying to stay awake!!!

Nope. Personally if I saw a game where a team used the "stall," I would not be upset. The team is just making it easy for me.

Peace

Washington does the same thing...shot clock for girls but not for boys. HAve had some games on the boys side where I wished there was one - team stalling, final score in the teens, and some girls games where I wished there wasn't one - final score 107-11 and they had to shoot or it would be a turnover...

Agree. What we personally like or dislike isn't germane or relevant to the way that we call the game. If what a team is doing is legal, there's no reason to get involved. And you sureasheck can't make any valid argument in favor of getting involved in something that is legal and none of your business either(like a coach hollering at one of his players:D ).

I don't think the question was asking whether we would "inset" ourselves and call differently if a team was stalling...just asking for personal experiences/preferences about using a shot clock or not.

Who cares if a team goes to a stall? We don't get paid by the hour so I don't mind the clock running and me not having to run. ;) Seriously though, in my area I don't see too many teams that really sit on the ball. I like not having a shot clock and allowing some teams to "take the air out of the ball" and make other teams play their tempo. It's nice to see some different styles of play.

Shut up.<i></i>

Why? :D

Just curious - do you use the shot clock or not in games played by hermaphrodites? :confused:

Thrown In Ramification
 

I think this was touched on earlier in the thread (and i hope the NFHS makes this a case play), but what will happen in this situation under the new rule?

A1 has the ball for an AP throw in. B4 is whistled for a kicked ball violation. The table (a) switches the arrow or (b) does not switch the arrow.

Which is going to be correct? :confused:

I'm traveling to Vegas this weekend, but it seems that I have some research to do when I return. ;) The three NV officials associations used to be part of the CBOA. (You paying attention here Rut! Also some of the members of my NV association work CA games in the Sacramento area and a few of us have even worked CIF postseason games. So not only did we register there, but also worked there.) We left just prior to the start of last season due to the new insurance deal that the CBOA decided to sign with the NFHS. So we used to get the CBOA manual, but did not this past season. Therefore, it is entirely possible that this sentence on page 22 is new and I was not aware of it. I'll have to check. CA may NOW use NCAA rules for its shot clock, whereas they did not before.
PS Your whole quote was not the issue. I granted you the fact that there is a difference on a kicked ball and you clearly stated such. There used to be many other differences which were subtle. For example, could you look in the new book and tell me how the shot clock is handled when a double personal foul occurs with the offensive team in control? That used to be one difference between the NCAA and CBOA shot clock rules.

Choice (b) is correct.

See the NFHS press release announcing the rules changes on the website.

"A change in Rule 4-42-5 adds the word "legally" to the current rule regarding when a throw-in ends. The revised rule will read as follows: "The throw-in ends when the passed ball touches, or is legally touched, by another player who is either inbounds or out of bounds.
In the past, the rule could "reward" a defensive team that committed a violation, such as kicking the ball during a throw-in. With the previous rule, if a throw-in was kicked by the defense, it could cause the offensive team to be disadvantaged from an alternating-possession standpoint. By adding "legally" to the current rule that defines when a throw-in ends, it eliminates this type of situation from happening."

So does anyone know yet whether we'll switch the arrow on A's subsequent throw-in, or will A keep the AP arrow until the next held ball situation because of the kick? Furthermore, does anyone know for certain, or are we just assuming these interpretations?

"Does anybody really know what time it is? Does anybody really care?"

Sorry...need more coffee this morning.

Chicago (Actually, at that time - Chicago Transit Authority), 1969

You may now return to your regularly-scheduled thread.

And, to keep serious (for just a second), why wouldn't the arrow remain with A? The subsequent throw-in is for the kicking violation; since the AP throw-in was never completed, the arrow should not change.

Think of it this way - let's say there's a common foul on B (no bonus) before the AP throw-in is completed, and the ball will be put back to the same throw-in spot. You wouldn't change the arrow on that resulting throw-in, would you?

That's the way I understand it as well. The first throw in is an AP throw-in. The second one is a throw-in following violation.

The deal we signed was with NASO not NFHS.
The shot clock is not reset on a double foul if there is team control, just like NCAA.

No, I wouldn't.

Just wondering what the rule change will mean in a broader perspective. I usually stay away from discussing/applying "new" rules until I can see how they're actually written into the rulebook and can see how the casebook was updated.

M&M Guy: There is already a rule in place that says a foul committed by either team during AP throw-in does not cause the team to lose the arrow. (Although in my locale, I often feel like I am the only person who knows this rule :cool: )

Since I am at the table alot each winter (and looks like I'll be moreso thiscoming year), I want to be sure I handle the situation properly. So i would gladly welcome a new case play on this once NFHS releases its new cases that invole the rule changes.

Consider this scenario:
AP throwin for A. After the release of the ball, B1 is the first to touch the ball in bounds when he kicks it.
Last year, the arrow would be changed because the throw-in was completed. With the rule change this year, the arrow will not be changed because the throw-in was completed.

BTW, I'll enforce it, but I don't have to like it. :)

I believe last year we debated it to the conclusion that the rule was ambiguous, there was nothing that declared which action was considered to have occured first. Some of us argued that it was the violation...as a parallel to a jumper catching the jump ball that was not so long ago clarified to effectively have the violation occur before the catch. This year, they've added a rule to designate what was really desired....to match the priority of violation over other events such as setting or flipping the arrow.

As I was typing that, I was starting to remember that discussion more clearly. You're right, the rule was ambiguous in that you didn't know what happened "first."

_________________________________

AGREED! One of the most interesting thing I have ever seen was a HS girls V game between a run and gun team and a slow down team. Team 2 inbounded at the start of the second quarter, the girl dribbled to the arch and held the ball on her hip for 7:40, then they scored on a little back door alley oop play. 2 points the entire quarter. It also got into the first team's head and they never regrouped. Totally took them out of their game. A much less talented team walked away with a win because of "unique" strategy and the inability of a HC to make the proper adjustments to it.

As for the outstretched arms for not closely guarded... it's about time. It's a good signal that lets people know that you see it and are not just daydreaming.

Shot Clock ???
 

From refnrev: "One of the most interesting thing I have ever seen was a HS girls V game between a run and gun team and a slow down team."

Many years ago, after officiating a junior varsity boys game between South Catholic (Hartford, CT) and Bristol (CT) Central, I stayed to watch the varsity game that followed, and decided to sit right behind the South Catholic bench, because I wanted to watch Coach Joe Reilly, who at the time was considered one of the best coaches in Connecticut.

Coach Reilly knew that he had an uphill battle. Bristol Central was ranked number one in the state and had a kid named Huckaby, who would later go on to star for Boston College, as well as a few other Division I prospects. Coach Reilly decided to run a stall offense. I couldn't believe how well coached and how patient his players, led by his point guard son, were. They were instructed to only take uncontested layups for the entire game. South Catholic lost that game 17 to 14, but could have won the game if they hadn't missed a wide open layup and a few foul shots. It was one of the most interesting, and exciting, games that I've ever observed. I believe that this was when the NFHS had the "lack of action" rule so South Catholic couldn't just hold the ball.

I know a lot of officials would disagree with me, probably the majority, especially those who officiate college ball, as well as high school ball, but I don't think that we need a shot clock in high school basketball. Just my, probably minority, opinion, for what it's worth.

I agree 100%, for a number of reasons, but mostly because it adds a dimension of pressure to the offense that discourages the fundamentals of the game. If you look at the origins of the rule, it was to drive up scoring and encourage uptempo offenses, neither of which really have a basis in the origin of the game.

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.

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.

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.

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.