Rule change time again

[Adam]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

Is Jim right when he talks about a Safety Time-Out? If he is, I'm completely against it. but I'm assuming he's just joking. SO what is a Safety Time-Out?

Jim quoted the suggestion and rationale word for word.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Jim quoted the suggestion and rationale word for word.

It's just too weird. I frankly don't believe it. I think it's a joke.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

I would love this to happen. We would have a safety timeout, coaches would get whacked and we'd shoot free throws.

You forgot the next step.

....and the safety timeout would be revoked the next year.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

You forgot the next step.

....and the safety timeout would be revoked the next year.

Exactly. Perhaps even mid-year.

[jalons]

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap

Next year, starting the game with a coin toss will be proposed. But who will we toss the coin toward?

The IGHSAU (Iowa Girls) used to start their games this way..... THIS CENTURY!

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by jalons

The IGHSAU (Iowa Girls) used to start their games this way..... THIS CENTURY!

Used to? They've changed?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

It's just too weird. I frankly don't believe it. I think it's a joke.

Unfortunately, it's not. I've obtained a copy of the actual rules proposal document, and that is really what it says!

[jalons]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

Used to? They've changed?

During the 2004-05 and 2005-06 seasons, the Iowa Girls decided who would start the game with the ball by a coin-toss during the captains' meeting. I believe it was the home team who would call "heads" or "tails," and the winner of the toss received the ball. There was no option of deferring if a team desired to do so. The possession arrow would then be set towards the loser of the toss. The reasoning, from what I heard, is that the officials weren't being consistent in throwing the ball straight up for the jump ball and the players risked injury by having to jump to start the game. I don't know for sure which was the true reason behind the coin toss.

The Iowa Girls Union also implemented a state adaptation where the possession arrow reversed as soon as the ball was at the disposal of the player for the throw-in. That changed for the 2006-07 season.

[Nevadaref]

So currently do you toss the ball or a coin at the start of the game?

[Texas Aggie]

I still think the best way to keep a game moving in the last couple of minutes is to allow a throw in option for all fouls, possibly including shooting fouls. This removes most incentive to foul to stop the clock unless one team just can't inbound the ball.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

So currently do you toss the ball or a coin at the start of the game?

They quit doing the coin toss the year I left. There are some other differences, as jalons states. The arrow was one (wasn't aware they'd changed it.) It was the one difference I liked, personally.
Also, they line up for free throws the college way (lower block empty, top block can be occupied.) Girls allow the coaching box, boys do not. Previously, there were no indirect Ts in girls ball (not sure if these have changed.) There has been a concerted effort lately to make the rules more similar to the boys.

I'd never heard the reasoning that officials were inconsistent. I had heard there was concern over players getting hurt during jump balls, so that's why they went to the coin toss for a few years (I'm pretty sure it was more than 2 seasons.) My guess is the guy who proposed the safety timeout is related to the one who got the coin toss getting implemented.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Unfortunately, it's not. I've obtained a copy of the actual rules proposal document, and that is really what it says!

Agreed. I wish it was a joke.
The rationale for ending team control is not quite as lame; even though the proposal itself is less than horrifying.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Agreed. I wish it was a joke.
The rationale for ending team control is not quite as lame; even though the proposal itself is less than horrifying.

What is the point in this proposal? Is it aimed at introducing some kind of "loose ball foul" into the HS game? Is it aimed at eliminating the 10 count when a ball goes into back court? Eliminating 3 seconds durring an interrupted dribble or when the ball is knocked away? What exactly is the submitter hoping to accomplish?

Edited to add: I just noticed this was submitted by the same person as the proposal to combine team and player control fouls into a single "offensive foul" rule. I guess you'd have to make the change above in order to actually combine these since you can't have a player control foul during an interrupted dribble (or indeed any time when no player is in control of the ball, excepting an airborne shooter).

Which is not to say that I agree with it. It should still be a team control foul even without player control. So I guess I disagree with both proposals.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

Edited to add: I just noticed this was submitted by the same person as the proposal to ....

OKay, I see

These are rules changes that people have submitted to the committee? Not rules that have come OUT from the committee? I mean, the committee has not yet signed off on these? Okay, I feel better now...

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

OKay, I see

These are rules changes that people have submitted to the committee? Not rules that have come OUT from the committee? I mean, the committee has not yet signed off on these? Okay, I feel better now...

Yes. Apparently these are the proposals that the committee will consider for next season.

And I feel better knowing that some of these are not a done deal.