Rule Change Proposals for '08
 

Hey everybody. It's that time once again when rule change proposals are being submitted. I've been asked for some thoughts on this, and so I thought I'd ask all of you if there are any changes that you'd like to propose (and which I could pass on).

If you have a proposal, please write it out as it would appear in the book and list any other rules or cases that the change would affect. (The affected rules and cases must be included in the rule change submission.)

I'm interested to see if Dan's proposal this year is the same as last year's. :)

Yes it is.

OK, because he asked me again in an email on a completely different subject I'll post here what I just told him in my response...

Rule 3-4 addition

The color, style, and design of all teammates' game jerseys and game pants shall be alike.

Would have to add a case book play to cover illegal pants.

This would match up the FED to the NCAA rule on pants.

You're wanting to add uniform requirements.

As a former coworker used to say, "That's like asking for homework."

Hmmm, not sure I actually care if their pants match. And I surely don't need another thing to add to the list of fashion policing issues we already have to endure.

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. :p

oh mark mark mark
 

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 :D

I'm sure it wouldn't take any extra effort to ensure that the pants match in color since you already are looking @ the uniforms already.

I have never actually seen a team play with pants that were a different color then their jersey's.It just seems like a contradiction to insure that the headband/sweatbands, undershirts are the correct color but then not have anything in place that says the pants have to match.

Furthermore I'm sure most retailers who are selling uniforms already make them the same color already.

It just doesn't make since that we don't have the phraseology in the FED's rule book that requires the color to match like the NCAA RB.

As JR had pointed out in another thread, the FED RB currently would allow all players of a team to wear different colored pants/shorts as long as their jersey's match in color. Why not make it so that both have to match? :)

About 2 years ago I was working a post season game with team that had about 3 different colors of pants. This was a lower-income school where it was clear they did not have the money or resources to buy uniforms on a regular basis. Yes a rule in place might make more sense but you will create potential problems outside of the NF jurisdiction and why I kind of think the NF does not need to micro manage every item a player wears.

Peace

1. Create an option for choosing to take the ball out of bounds instead of shooting foul shouts in the last 2 minutes.
2. Reduce timeouts to 3 for the whole game.
3. Remove the protection for a ball on the rim (International)
4. Mandate the number of assistant coaches that can sit on or around the bench area.
5. Two 16-minute halves
6. Only active players may request a timeout

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.

??:confused: :confused: ??

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

I would really like to see a change to the free throw line up requirements to be in line with the NCAA. We work several prep schools around here that use NCAA rules and it is just so much easier to officiate when the players are above the blocks and they can come in on the release.

(edited to add) And lining up this way would help with the transition to NCAA for those players that go on to play at that level...

I also agree with the time-out suggestion. Let's go back to having the request come from the floor.

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?

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 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.

You really are masochistic.

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

I'll offer mine again, as well.

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

Another one asking for homework.

Who cares? If it helps to keep <b>half</b> 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.

Here is my offering!
 

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!

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.

I agree with refneck.

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

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.

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

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.

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.

What a PITA

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

NO F'ING CHANGES!!!!!

Why don't we just allow all contact and change the name of the game to Lacrosse? ;)

OK:

1a. 10-6 Penalty: Amend 3 to read "Bonus Free throw beginning with the 7th team foul each half whether or not the first free throw is successful." Then, amend 4 to read "Two free throws if intentional or flagrant, or for all fouls beginning with the 10th team foul, plus ball for throw-in."

1b. Amend 10-6 Penalty 1 to add "f. At any point when the offended (fouled) team has the right to shoot one or more free throws, at the option of the captain or coach, the team may choose to resume play with a throw-in. This option is available until the first free throw is administered."

2. Change 5-9-3 to read as follows: "Grants a player's oral or visual or a head coach's visual request for a time out..."

3. (I'll get this later)

4. Amend Rule 1, Section 13 Article 3 to add the following: "Penalty -- for either a lack of a coaching box or an incorrectly laid box: Technical foul is assessed to the home team to begin the game. This foul shall also be indirectly charged to the head coach. No technical foul shall be charged to a designated home team not playing in its customary home location (example, tournament)."

5. Amend Rule 9, Section 1, Article 4 to read: "The restrictions ... apply until the ball is released by the thrower."

These may not be the optimum wording for each change, which is why I don't really understand the need for exact wording, but here you go. I do, however, think this is a good exercise to dive into the rule book and make sure you are aware of where all rules are referenced.

I'll amend later with case citations.

Clarify masochistic for me. Because, as I read it defined in the dictionary. I do not like the way it comes across.

Do you mean:

a sexual perversion characterized by pleasure in being subjected to pain or humiliation especially by a love object.

pleasure in being abused or dominated : a taste for suffering .

Amend 3-5-3a to read Headbands or hair control devices must be white or a single solid color similar to the torso of the jersey and must be the same color for each item and all participants. Only one item is permitted on the head and on each wrist. Items must be mositure-absorbing, nonabrasive and unaforned (except for logo, see 3-6

Oh, you sweet talker, you.

My rule book is in my duffel, which is in the car, which is outside, which is 10 degrees, and the dogs are all done, so the citation will have to come later.

The penalty for not immediately returning to the floor after a throw-in shall be a violation. This would not affect other instances of not immediately returning to the floor and would be akin to the change in penalty for leaving the court.

THis is all I meant, nothing more. Someone who enjoys pain, as in, more uniform rules to think about. Ugh.

Ok, Got it!!!!

Come on !! Garth :D

Whistle for soccer officials.
 

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.

Chuck:

Its good to hear from you. I hope you have had a good season.

MTD, Sr.

Best rule change in years... Has cleaned up fouls on FTs immensely! Would be a good adoption for the HS game I think.

Agreed -- this would be a positive change as well. Since we now have POI on double fouls it appears that we have established that HS officials can handle it! :)

Hate this.

So, after a made free throw a coach turns to me and says, "Time out!" and I ignore his request because he is not signaling with his hands?

No... *I* wouldn't do it, but I bet some officials would! (We have officials that won't even grant a coach's "Time out on the make" request because they get so buried in the rule book they force him to request the TO again after the FT is made)

Are a lot of you having problems with coaches calling timeout? I generally have not -- and there have been times when the coach calls timeout when NONE of his players do in a certain game situation.

Now, with the coach being able to call timeout, they have to understand that we cannot always hear or see them during play... That is just part of the game. Also, they should stop naming plays "Five out", etc. :)

[QUOTE=Texas Aggie]

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./QUOTE]


This is something that is a state issue, not a FED issue

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.

Absolutely....makes the most sense. Cleans up some very odd corner cases in an already complicated rule.

#1....like the "option" idea...except...how long do you give the coach/team time to decide?

#2...will not happen...coaches like the rule as it is

#3...Why? Not broke, don't fix it....so what if it cuts 3 minutes out of a game (2 x 1 min./intermission + some slop time)...that only benefits the refs...and that's not a good enough reason to change.

....

#5...You think the current situation is hard to enforce and is not being enforced uniformly? That was exactly the reason they changed to what we have!!! Two parts....the ball hitting the backboard/rim is a very clear and obvious point in time....the player releasing the ball is not (each player's style is slightly different and timing the entry was irregular). Also, players were shoving and pushing each other around while the ball was in the air and officials were not enforcing it uniformly (if at all). They changed it to clean up rough play.

I think we should adopt the women's college mechanic for dealing with the dreaded "blarge". I didn't have an opinion on this until last night. :D

As far as uniform stuff, let's make it all legal, or all illegal. The way uniform regulations are written now and especially our state adapations are written aren't any fun. Let us officials have to worry about playing the game of basketball, not dressing kids.

Home players must wear white Chuck Taylors. Visitors must wear black Chuck Taylors.:D

Good old Chuck Taylors.:D

My Opinion
 

ChuckElias: Sorry, I'm not going to rewrite the rule book for your committee, but I will give you my opinion on some rule changes:

1) Go back to when coaches couldn't request time outs.
2) Add team control during a throwin, with some back court exceptions.
3) Coin toss to start game. Since they did away with all the jump balls many, many years ago, I know that I, and I'm sure some of my colleagues, don't spend as much time understanding the jump ball rules as we use to, and don't practice the the mechanics of how to toss a ggood jump ball.

Rules I'd like to see
 

1. Instead of coaches getting the seatbelt for a T, they should have their feet shackled together. Sideline privileges are retained.
2. After 5 personal fouls, players may remain in the game but must wear their underwear outside their uniforms.
3. All assistant coaches, regardless of number, must hold hands on the bench. When one stands, they all must stand. When he/she sits, they all must sit.
4. All players must wear wrestling singlets so we don't have to remind them to tuck in anything.
5. On free throws, just let all non shooters start in the lane and allow full contact.
6. Refs are allowed to flip off any fans that mouth off.
7. Refs are allowed to reply to a coaches comment of, "you suck!" with, "No, you suck!"

These are just a few that I'd personally like to see.

Ugh! Only if the host school supplies the coin.

Immediately comes to mind.

I'm not sure that's accurate. I have heard a lot of coaches ask me for how best to call a timeout and when I suggest a visual signal be added to the rules, the response has ranged from nothing to "yeah, that might work better." Some coaches haven't received timeouts they asked for and were charged timeouts when they actually said things like "five out."

The "if its not broke" mentality would lead us back to the days of no three point shot and no team control fouls. We would only have 2 potential last second shots and with each team being given a timeout to use at their discretion, they can take it when it benefits them, and not on a specific schedule. Plus, the game flows better. We use 16 minutes halves in most summer leagues and camps around here, so I speak from some experience.

I've officiated under both systems (in high school), and I like the former system MUCH better. I never had any problem with releases and it is much easier for the lead official in particular to call. Its easier for both the trail and lead (or C and lead) to enforce the release as its all at eye level. Can you really tell me that you are good enough to see both the rim and the players from a reasonable distance? I'm not and I've been doing this a long time. Plus, I have EXTRAORDINARY ranges of vision -- both top to bottom and peripheral. A lot of that is from past training and I'm quite sure it isn't unique to me by any stretch. I add it only for reference.

You talk about not being broke. The former lane restrictions weren't broke. I was amazed when they changed the rule. I can't remember ever getting more than a quick comment from a coach about a possible lane violation. Now I hear such protests a dozen times a year, at minimum. As far as shoving, are you seriously suggesting there's little or no contact NOW? It just comes at a different time. Plus, that's why we have the rules on fouls and in my view, these are fairly easy calls to make.

Yes, particularly in games with only 2 officials. I still have some of those.

Hee, hee, heee....

Had a coach last night get a bit frustrated. Then again, I'd just tuned him out since he seemed to have a comment or question on about 75% of the plays. He had to yell it at me, and by the time I heard him the ball was closer to the base line; he didn't check on the throwin spot before setting up his play, and had a sideline play ready for the kids.

Use the AP arrow to begin all overtime periods rather than using a jump ball.

Justification: The AP arrow has already been established. If multiple overtime periods are necessary, a clear advantage is given to the team who is able to execute this play (via height or quickness). The AP arrow is used to start each quarter, why not each overtime period?

6-1-1 The game shall be started by a jump ball in the center restraining circle ... (removed "and each extra period")

remove "or extra period" from Note area of 6-1-2

6-2-1 The game begins when the ball becomes live as specified in 6-1-2 for a jump ball, throw-in or free throw. (removed "and each extra period")

6-2-2 To start the game the ball shall be put in play in the center restraining cirlcle by a jump ball between any two opponents. (removed "and each extra period")

6-2-3 To start the second, third and fourth quarters and each extra period, the ball shall be put in play by a throw-in under the alternating-possession procedure.

6-4-1 In all jump-ball situations, other than the start of the game, the teams will alternate taking the ball out of bounds for a throw-in ... (removed "and each extra period")

6-4-2 To start the second, third and fourth quarters and each extra period, the throw-in shall be from out of bounds at the division line opposite the scorer's and timer's table.

Rule 2-3 is the only "rule". All the other current rules are reworded as to be only "suggestions."

LOL. My first almost spit my coffee out moment of the day.:) :) :)

Like the trafic 'laws' in Massachusetts?

Word.

Those were improvements that changed the actual game....not sure how quarters vs. halves really make that much difference....NCAA vs. NBA....both are happy with what they have and neither has (as far as I know) considered switching.
You spend MOST of you effort talking about the lessor reason it was changed. The primary reason is the contact that little to no one ever called. The post release to rebound interval was becoming a free-for-all pushing session. Sure it could have been cleaned up by calling fouls and the NFHS tried to get that point across with POE's....but officials didn't responsd....it didn't work. Freezing the players until it hits did dramatically clean up the contact. There is still some but they just don't have the time to ride their opponent as far away from (or under) the basket as possible. Also remember that the NFHS had already been on the wait-til-it-hits rule before the release rule...so they had actual data to compare the two.....it was no experiment.

Even assuming I bought your assertion that this was a problem (I never thought it was a problem, plus I DID respond to this issue in my post -- read it more carefully), you don't solve one problem by creating a new rule that has little to do with that problem. You ask, as they have done for years on things like intentional fouls, the officials to call the fouls that occur.

This would be great for any team with 3+ assistants. The first time they stand, the HC is gone.