Rule Change Proposals for '08

[Mark Padgett]

I still think we should eliminate possession as part of the penalty for a technical foul. We should always use POI. Think of it this way - if there's a technical against the offensive team, they lose two shots and possession. 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.

I realize that if a technical occurs during a time of no team control and we're using POI, we would have to use the AP arrow instead according to the current rule, but that should be changed to treat POI like the NBA rule. That means that if a technical is called, you "freeze" the game, take the shots, then resume the game where you left off. I think that makes sense, since a technical is something that takes place "outside" the normal playing of the game.

However, I do not support changing the penalty from two shots to one shot, like the NBA.

Another rule change I would like to see is a requirement for coaches to always have their mouths taped shut during games. This would be an advantage for everyone, including the players.

[cmathews]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

I still think we should eliminate possession as part of the penalty for a technical foul. We should always use POI. Think of it this way - if there's a technical against the offensive team, they lose two shots and possession. 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.

I realize that if a technical occurs during a time of no team control and we're using POI, we would have to use the AP arrow instead according to the current rule, but that should be changed to treat POI like the NBA rule. That means that if a technical is called, you "freeze" the game, take the shots, then resume the game where you left off. I think that makes sense, since a technical is something that takes place "outside" the normal playing of the game.

However, I do not support changing the penalty from two shots to one shot, like the NBA.

Another rule change I would like to see is a requirement for coaches to always have their mouths taped shut during games. This would be an advantage for everyone, including the players.

If we use your last rule change wouldn't that nullify the need for the other one?? LOL...and then there are the uniform requiremets with tape, does it match the color of the jersey/sport coat/sweatshirt etc....oh my

[LDUB]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

I still think we should eliminate possession as part of the penalty for a technical foul. We should always use POI. Think of it this way - if there's a technical against the offensive team, they lose two shots and possession. 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.

Maybe go POI on common fouls too.

I still think we should eliminate possession as part of the penalty for a common foul. We should always use POI. Think of it this way - if there's a common foul against the offensive team, they lose possession. If there's a common foul against the defensive team, they aren't penalized at all because they didn't have possession in the first place. This means the severity of penalty for a common foul 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 common foul if you have the ball than if you don't. That's illogical.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by LDUB

Think of it this way - if there's a common foul against the offensive team, they lose possession.

?? ??

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

?? ??

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

[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?

[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.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by 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.

Except for the NCAA FT item (which I have no opinion on), I agree 100% with the rest.....for that matter, merge TC and PC into one foul....a foul commited by a player on the team in control (which includes the player in control) or by an airborne shooter.

[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.

[texaspaul]

I agree with refneck.

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

[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.

[ChuckElias]

Folks, just a reminder. If you'd like me to pass along your proposals, they must be written out as they will appear in the rule book. I can't pass along "make the FT spaces the same as NCAA" or "standardize the NCAA and HS rules for hair control devices" to the NFHS Rules Committee.

If you would like your idea to receive consideration, please type it out as it would actually appear in the rule book, with the rule citation; and include citations for any rules or cases that your new rule would affect. Thanks.

[Dan_ref]

What a PITA

So here's my request, rewritten to meet your special needs:

NO F'ING CHANGES!!!!!

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I know, I know, we are supposed to be talking about basketball, BUT:

"Daryl the Preacher" and I were officiating in the Paulding (Ohio) Knights of Columbus Annual Special Olympics Basketball Tournament this past Saturday and a fan had a very unique whistle which he sound each time his team would score a field goal.

Now many of you know that I officiated NFHS fut bol from 1993 until 2006. and many of you know that I do not always see eye to eye with soccer officials (only the ones that only officiate soccer) about many things regarding sports officiating.

Getting back to the whistle this past weekend. I belive that the NFHS should adopt this whistle and the mandatory whistle for all H.S. soccer officals. The whistle makes this lovely sounding steam locomotive train whistle. I think it would be great if H.S. soccer officials had to use this whistle. I think it would do great things to improve their stature in the eyes of their fellow sports officials.

MTD, Sr.