New books today.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

2007-08 NFHS Point Of Emphasis:

2) Free Throws. The NFHS Basketball Rules Committee continues to be concerned about activities surrounding free throws, especially rough play.

A. Rough Play. Keeping the block between the players continues to serve its initial purpose. The same is true for player restrictions ending when the attempt hits the ring. Coaches must not teach players to "lock up" arms along the lane line, nor drive players farther under the basket with brute force. Offensive players in the second position must not be permitted to displace or push the defensive player in the first lane position. In addition, defensive players in the last position should not be permitted to displace the free throw shooter. Fouls must be called for illegal contact and displacement on free throws, just as they would for illegal rebounding activity off of any try.

B. Lane Positioning. There has been much debate on what, if anything, to do with lane positioning on free throws. Some want rules that would players up on the low block or even eliminate the first lane space. The belief is that the players underneath the basket are at a rebounding disadvantage. Data collected from a variety of sources does not support that belief. Multiple studies show players in the first marked lane spaced garner approximately 75-80 percent of all free throws rebounds. That is a range the rules committee finds acceptable and is consistent with historical norms. The team closest to the basket is supposed to get most of the rebounds, not be guaranteed a rebound. The rules in that case are also not designed to give each team an equal chance at securing a rebound.

C. Violations. Players are attempting to gain a rebounding advantage by violating the free throw restrictions and entering the lane early. Officials must review and enforce the rules regarding offensive and defensive free throw violations.

I guess that new data, collected from a greater variety of new sources, and new multiple studies, showed that players in the first marked lane spaced garnered less than 75-80 percent of all free throws rebounds, a range the rules committee finds unacceptable, and inconsistent, with historical norms???

I call BS. I don't agree that 80% of the time, the D ends up with the rebound in the old system. Mind you, I don't have "many studies" - but just my experience.

You mentioned before that you've done 27 seasons. Surely in that time you've figured the Fed out.

C. I am a stickler for things like this, and I only call 1-2 FTLV(s) per season. In my opinion, the Fed's concern doesn't have a leg to stand on, for games that I do.

A. Like I said, I have few fouls on rebounds. I see lots of A players getting around B players for the ball. More than 20% for sure. I don't remember seeing players locking arms, and especially driving opponents further under the basket.

I think you trust the NFHS too much. Just my 2 cents.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

I call BS. You mentioned before that you've done 27 seasons. Surely in that time you've figured the Fed out. I think you trust the NFHS too much.

JugglingReferee: When you call BS, what's the proper signal?

No, I haven't completely figured out the NFHS, especially when it comes to new rules. In thinking about the new rules that have "come down the pike" from the NFHS in the past twenty-seven years, one thing that pops up is that many new rules seem to trickle down from above, usually the NCAA, but occasionally the NBA, often in response to a particular player, or play. Georgetown's Patrick Ewing's gray T-Shirt, and Virginia's Ralph Sampson putting one hand on the backboard, and dunking with the other hand, led to NCAA rules regarding T-Shirt colors, and gaining an advantage by placing a hand on the backboard . The Knick's Trent Tucker's catch, and shoot basket, with 0.1 second left, led to the NBA's 0.3 seconds tip rule. All three of these trickled down to the NFHS in short time. But in some cases I don't understand where new rules come from. Furthermore, I am always confused about why the NFHS doesn't seem to listen to officials, those of us out there in the trenches, when we ask for rule changes. The one that comes to mind is allowing coaches to request time outs from the bench, a rule that has led to many tough situations for officials since it was installed by the NFHS several years ago.

Do I trust the NFHS? I have no choice. I have to. With few exceptions, that's the only set of rules we use here in Connecticut for public school games.

Finally, regarding the new eliminating the first lane space rule. I believe that I'm in agreement with you on this one. I don't think that it's going to effect my game that much. I have occasionally had an offensive player, in the second lane space, above the block, illegally push, and displace, a defender, in the first lane space, below the block, under the basket to gain an advantage to secure a rebound, but it did not happen a lot, and when it did, I called a foul on the offensive player. I've also had the defensive player, in the first lane space, under the block, illegally box out the offensive player, in the second lane space, above the block, by illegally pushing, and displacing, the offensive player back toward the third lane space, but again, but it did not happen a lot, and when it did, I called a foul on the defensive player.

Last year the NFHS Rules Committee stated that they were not going to eliminate the first lane space because data collected from a variety of sources did not support the belief that the players underneath the basket are at a rebounding disadvantage. The committee continued that multiple studies showed players in the first marked lane spaced garnered approximately 75-80 percent of all free throws rebounds, a range the committee found acceptable that was consistent with historical norms, because the team closest to the basket was supposed to get most of the rebounds. One year later, and they're eliminating the first lane space. In that one year time frame did a new study find results opposite to their previous multiple studies and historical norms? Or did they change it because the NCAA-W and the NCAA-M rules were changed?

[mick]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

You pull out a picture of Billy Packer from your pocket and point to it.

Whatsamatta? No new books to talk about?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

You pull out a picture of Billy Packer from your pocket and point to it.

If we don't have a photo of Billy Packer, will the NFHS allow us to use this:

[doubleringer]

I like the change in free throws. We have had that adaptation in Iowa for our girls and on the women's side for some time. I think it helps cut down on some of the pushing for rebounds. Just my opinion of course.