Rule Change Proposals for '08

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

I think he means "committed by" the offensive team.

Yea, probably, but I just want to be sure. I'm a word person, and in a verbal medium, word choice is important. I'm gonna just hammer away at it.

If he does mean "committed by the offensive team", then I disagree with him. Losing possession is the only penalty that can be inflicted, especially since we don't give shots on TC fouls. How is that not fair?

[truerookie]

I would like the Fed's to come in line with the NCAA when it comes to hair control devices or headbands:

Be single soldi-colored, similar to the dominant color of the game jersey, white, black or beige.

Team control: A team shall be in control when: When a player of that team has disposal of the ball for a throw-in.

[blindzebra]

I like the NCAA FT.

TC on throw-ins.

Make failing to enter after legally being OOB a violation instead of a T.

One mechanic change would be making the fist the signal for all "offensive" control fouls...TC and PC.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by truerookie

I would like the Fed's to come in line with the NCAA when it comes to hair control devices or headbands: thus, capturing the thin devices currently in use that does not fall within the rules. Thanks

You really are masochistic.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

Yea, probably, but I just want to be sure. I'm a word person, and in a verbal medium, word choice is important. I'm gonna just hammer away at it.

If he does mean "committed by the offensive team", then I disagree with him. Losing possession is the only penalty that can be inflicted, especially since we don't give shots on TC fouls. How is that not fair?

Juulie, if you consider his post sort of a "modest proposal" in response to Padgett's suggestion, it makes more sense.

[Adam]

I'll offer mine again, as well.

Switch the AP arrow as soon as you hand the ball to the thrower for the throwin.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by truerookie

I would like the Fed's to come in line with the NCAA when it comes to hair control devices or headbands:

Be single soldi-colored, similar to the dominant color of the game jersey, white, black or beige.

Another one asking for homework.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

If there's a technical against the defensive team, they lose only two shots because they didn't have possession in the first place. This means the severity of penalty for a technical is different for a team with the ball vs. a team without the ball. The implication is that it is a worse offense to commit a technical if you have the ball than if you don't. That's illogical.

Who cares? If it helps to keep half the coaches quiet, then I'm all for it.

It's just an additional penalty that was implemented to maybe make coaches think about it before they start yapping. I've already run into a few coaches that were smart enough to delay their b!tching until their team lost possession.

[Ref in PA]

9-9-3

A player from the team not in control may legally jump from his/her frontcourt, secure the ball with both feet off the floor and return to the floor with one or both feet in the backcourt. The player may make a normal landing and it makes no difference whether the first foot down is in the frontcourt or backcourt.

Eliminated “(defensive player or during a jump ball or throw-in)” from rule. This would also change the questionable interpretations on the NFHS website (6 and 7).

************

Change interpretation 10 from NFHS website to be NOT a violation. Ruling, The Catch/Touch by A2 in the backcourt is valid since B1 was the last to touch the ball.

If NFHS allows this interpretation to remain unchanged, Then: A1 is dribbling in his backcourt 5 feet from the division line. B1 dives from A’s frontcourt and while airborne taps the ball off of A1’s leg. Ruling: Team A has committed a backcourt violation. Yuck!

[tmp44]

Originally Posted by truerookie

I would like the Fed's to come in line with the NCAA when it comes to hair control devices or headbands:

Be single soldi-colored, similar to the dominant color of the game jersey, white, black or beige.

Team control: A team shall be in control when: When a player of that team has disposal of the ball for a throw-in.

I actually agree with this. Switching between NCAA-W and NFHS, especially NFHS-girls, if everything around the head has to be one color for the entire team, that makes it really easy on us if they're making us already be fashion police.

[texaspaul]

I agree with refneck.

Only players who have entered the court, legally, can innitiate a time out.

[Texas Aggie]

1. One of: either eliminate the 1 and 1 and go with 2 shots at 7 fouls and 2 shots plus the ball at 10 fouls, OR, allow an option to decline free throws and take the ball out of bounds for any (or non-shooting fouls) fouls where free throws are awarded.

2. Mandate that a coach must use a visual timeout signal and/or have the coach only call timeout during a stop in play.

3. 2 halves instead of 4 quarters.

4. Require a technical foul to start the game against the ACTUAL home team for all gyms that are not properly marked with a coaching box -- tournaments excluded.

5. Go back to allowing lane restrictions to end on a free throw on the release. Current rule is difficult to enforce and isn't being enforced uniformly.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by Refneck

6. Only active players may request a timeout

So the players that just stand around can't request one?

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

Losing possession is the only penalty that can be inflicted, especially since we don't give shots on TC fouls.

Y'know, Juulie - ya' gotta point here. I never took the inequity that far. The penalty for a common foul before the bonus does penalize an offensive team who commits one more than a defensive team who does. Then after the bonus, it switches the other way around - kind of. Perhaps the NF should rethink (assuming there was ever a "think" in the first place) the entire foul penalty situation.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Y'know, Juulie - ya' gotta point here. I never took the inequity that far. The penalty for a common foul before the bonus does penalize an offensive team who commits one more than a defensive team who does. Then after the bonus, it switches the other way around - kind of. Perhaps the NF should rethink (assuming there was ever a "think" in the first place) the entire foul penalty situation.

Or perhaps we should just encourage the kids to stop fouling so the inequities are erased.