NFHS New Rules are posted

[Grail]

Follow this link to see the new rules listing.

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

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Grail

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...

[BigGref]

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"

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by BigGref

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!

[Adam]

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?

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

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.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

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.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

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

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.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

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.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

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.

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.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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 their is no debate....a kick on the throwin occurs before the throwin ends.

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

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

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 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

[MJT]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

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!

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

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

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

Never mind.

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?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

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

Never mind.

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

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

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?

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