2009-2010 rule changes

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

Either allow any color of headband OR ONLY allow the primary color of the uniform (it is not fair that only the cream colored pre-wrap is legal -- make all pre-wrap colors legal or none of them legal UNLESS they match the uniform).

This is not completely correct. All colors of pre-wrap are legal, they just have to match or fit the subscribed colors listed by the rulebook. But I have seen black, red, blue and tan pre-wrap.

Peace

[jdmara]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

Either allow any color of headband OR ONLY allow the primary color of the uniform (it is not fair that only the cream colored pre-wrap is legal -- make all pre-wrap colors legal or none of them legal UNLESS they match the uniform).

Originally Posted by JRutledge

This is not completely correct. All colors of pre-wrap are legal, they just have to match or fit the subscribed colors listed by the rulebook. But I have seen black, red, blue and tan pre-wrap.

Peace

As JRut said, your impression of the headband rule is incorrect. Currently,

Headbands and wristbands must be white, black, beige or a single solid color similar to the torso of the jersey and must be the same color for each item and all participants.

.

Although I haven't had much problem with this rule, I think that perhaps it could use some tweaking. I don't care what color the headband is, to be honest. It should be required that all the headbands for every individual is the same/similar. Make it simple.

-Josh

[Texas Aggie]

I don't see 2 or 3 extra fouls in 1 out of every 4 or 5 games as a problem.

If this were the problem, I wouldn't be on here. We have games where the team down starts fouling with 2 and 3 MINUTES left in the game. And its more than in 20% of the games -- more like 50-70%. Last year, a team down by 15 started fouling with about 2 minutes left, plus they'd saved their timeouts (which is fair enough), and the last few minutes of the game lasted close to 20-25 minutes. They damn near won, so coaches (at least around here) think this is a viable strategy.

I realize other ares may be different, but I don't think that's an argument against the idea itself. I propose a choice that may not be used in your area due to what you see in your games. But it sure would be used in mine.

[Mrcrash3]

Rule Changes
How about eliminating the long switch in two man mechanics

Without us its only recess

[Stat-Man]

Pie in the sky, but hey, I can dream like everyone else, right

1-17: Also include an 8 foot substitution box (a la the NBA) for substitutes to report to before they can enter a game.

2-11: Make the penalty for removing the official book from the table that of the NCAA.

4-10: Add language similar to NCAA to clarify that if an offensive player is between a player with the ball and the defensive player, No closely guarded situation exists.

4-12: Have team control match up with NCAA.

[DonInKansas]

On the shot clock idea, I don't like it. I've seen scorer's tables that can barely keep up with the AP arrow and the game clock. Adding a shot clock would cause all kinds of problems.

[Berkut]

Originally Posted by DonInKansas

On the shot clock idea, I don't like it. I've seen scorer's tables that can barely keep up with the AP arrow and the game clock. Adding a shot clock would cause all kinds of problems.

Really?

We use a shot clock in new York and it causes, well, almost no problems. Sure, you ahve the occasional guy who falls asleep and doesnt start or reset it properly, but nothing major, really.

Problems with the operation of the shot clock are really a non-issue. I would guess the expense would be the major problem.

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

This is not completely correct. All colors of pre-wrap are legal, they just have to match or fit the subscribed colors listed by the rulebook. But I have seen black, red, blue and tan pre-wrap.

Peace

JRut,
My point is that cream (black, white and primary uniform color) is singled out while a purple prewrap (worn by the home team -- even though their secondary color is purple) is illegal. Cream (and black and white) get a unique preferential treatment. The other colors must match a uniform.

[jdmara]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

JRut,
My point is that cream (black, white and primary uniform color) is singled out while a purple prewrap (worn by the home team -- even though their secondary color is purple) is illegal. Cream (and black and white) get a unique preferential treatment. The other colors must match a uniform.

Beige was chosen because it is (or at least was) the most common color sold. This color was chosen so teams didn't have to buy special pre-wrap to be properly equipped. I'm sure the committee was looking out for the not well funded school districts in making this determination. It's really not a huge deal as long as all officials apply the rule correctly.

-Josh

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by jdmara

Beige was chosen because it is (or at least was) the most common color sold. This color was chosen so teams didn't have to buy special pre-wrap to be properly equipped. I'm sure the committee was looking out for the not well funded school districts in making this determination. It's really not a huge deal as long as all officials apply the rule correctly.

-Josh

Josh,
This issue was BY FAR THE biggest issue we had in pre-game of girls varsity games during the course of the season. MANY (decently-funded) schools had ONE COLOR of pre-wrap (the primary color of their ROAD uniform). It was an incredible hassle to make these girls take the head bands (that were really hair restraints, BUT went all the way around the head) off before the game. As the season went on, it got better, BUT, we still had teams during the last quarter of the season with wrong-colored pre-wrap. My point is that if the NFHS is concerned about costs when allowing "the most common color", why not just frickin allow the team's secondary color of pre-wrap?

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

Josh,
This issue was BY FAR THE biggest issue we had in pre-game of girls varsity games during the course of the season. MANY (decently-funded) schools had ONE COLOR of pre-wrap (the primary color of their ROAD uniform). It was an incredible hassle to make these girls take the head bands (that were really hair restraints, BUT went all the way around the head) off before the game. As the season went on, it got better, BUT, we still had teams during the last quarter of the season with wrong-colored pre-wrap. My point is that if the NFHS is concerned about costs when allowing "the most common color", why not just frickin allow the team's secondary color of pre-wrap?

Not a hassle for me. "Coach, those headbands are illegal." How hard was that?

Not even a hassle to explain the rule: "White, black, beige, or the primary uniform color; everyone must match."

People get their shorts knotted over all this, and I just don't get it. Do you whine so much about moving the players in the lane above the blocks? It's just a rule to enforce, and it's easier than it used to be. Sheesh.

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Not a hassle for me. "Coach, those headbands are illegal." How hard was that?

Not even a hassle to explain the rule: "White, black, beige, or the primary uniform color; everyone must match."

People get their shorts knotted over all this, and I just don't get it. Do you whine so much about moving the players in the lane above the blocks? It's just a rule to enforce, and it's easier than it used to be. Sheesh.

Hassle is perhaps not the proper term. I would guess that 50 - 80% of the girls games I did this year, we had to go to the head coach (or the player) and have them remove the headband. State situation: easy; explain rule: easy; having to force girls to remove the items/scramble to find the proper headbands put coaches in a foul mood to start the game.

Moving players up a position: easy. It is a rule. It is enforced equally for each game. This situation varies significantly from the headband/hair restraint rule.

Purpose of headband: Stop sweat from getting into eyes -- secondarily, it looks "cool".

Purpose of pre-wrap going around head: keep hair out of face and under control (in reality it SHOULD fit under the category of hair control device, BUT since it goes around the head, it doesn't). Secondarily, it does NOT look "cool" -- it serves a purpose. Since many officials apparently did NOT enforce the rule -- why else would we have the issue in the 18th, 19th and 20th games of the season? -- it creates unnecessary stress between players, coaches and officials before the game starts.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

Hassle is perhaps not the proper term. I would guess that 50 - 80% of the girls games I did this year, we had to go to the head coach (or the player) and have them remove the headband. State situation: easy; explain rule: easy; having to force girls to remove the items/scramble to find the proper headbands put coaches in a foul mood to start the game.

Still don't get it. I don't force them to do anything. I tell them that they can't play until they comply with the rule.

And I don't care what mood they're in.

[BayStateRef]

It is no big deal. Enforce the rule. Watch how fast a roll of beige or black pre-wrap is found. It is a rule and the coaches should know it. If other officials do not enforce the rule, what other rules are they setting aside? I have partners who don't like this rule and want to ignore it, but my assignors have told me to enforce it and I do.

If the NFHS wants to allow the secondary color or any color (as long as they all match) to be legal...fine. But I don't care if the rule is changed or not. BTW...I also have seen "illegal" colors in 80% or more of my games (all varsity) this year. I had one team who wore the "alternate" color during warmups and when I told the captains they were illegal, they said they knew that and would change to white before the game started. They did.

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

Hassle is perhaps not the proper term. I would guess that 50 - 80% of the girls games I did this year, we had to go to the head coach (or the player) and have them remove the headband. State situation: easy; explain rule: easy; having to force girls to remove the items/scramble to find the proper headbands put coaches in a foul mood to start the game.

Moving players up a position: easy. It is a rule. It is enforced equally for each game. This situation varies significantly from the headband/hair restraint rule.

Purpose of headband: Stop sweat from getting into eyes -- secondarily, it looks "cool".

Purpose of pre-wrap going around head: keep hair out of face and under control (in reality it SHOULD fit under the category of hair control device, BUT since it goes around the head, it doesn't). Secondarily, it does NOT look "cool" -- it serves a purpose. Since many officials apparently did NOT enforce the rule -- why else would we have the issue in the 18th, 19th and 20th games of the season? -- it creates unnecessary stress between players, coaches and officials before the game starts.

As late as the last week of the season, the JV officials did not enforce the rule. One of the first things we check when we go on the floor is headbands, pre-wrap, etc. If the colors are not legal, we inform the coach right off. Some protest [usually "We were told if it matches the trim..."] and usually, but not always, it is the home team that has the problem. I keep it simple. On the road you have 4 choices. At home you have only 3. If it is not taken care of in the first game, it sets a bad example for the 2nd game. And if you wait till there is 2 minutes to go, then it becomes more of a distraction to the coach and last minute instructions for the team before tipoff.