Rules changes Posted

The more minimal, the better. This is actually less than what the FED football brethren have to deal with in the fall.

[shishstripes]

What about the last of the edited rules:
Clarified that a player occupying a marked lane space must have one
foot positioned near the outer edge of the free-throw lane line with the
other foot positioned anywhere within the designated 36 inch lane space.

One foot forward and one foot back? Why? Am I reading this right?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by shishstripes

What about the last of the edited rules:
Clarified that a player occupying a marked lane space must have one
foot positioned near the outer edge of the free-throw lane line with the
other foot positioned anywhere within the designated 36 inch lane space.

One foot forward and one foot back? Why? Am I reading this right?

It's simply saying that at least one foot must be along the line. Can't have both feet back off the line.

[dsqrddgd909]

I read that as one foot has to be near the line and the other can be anywhere including near the line.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by shishstripes

What about the last of the edited rules:
Clarified that a player occupying a marked lane space must have one
foot positioned near the outer edge of the free-throw lane line with the
other foot positioned anywhere within the designated 36 inch lane space.

One foot forward and one foot back? Why? Am I reading this right?

That's not an edit, it's a rule change and I don't like it. It's designed, I'm sure, to slow down the reverse pivot move from the second spot.

1. I wish they'd quit hiding rule changes as editorial changes.
2. This is too nitpicky, IMO.

[rockchalk jhawk]

Rough play isn't a POE this year? Isn't this the first year in quite a few (i seem to remember it from at least the last 3 or 4) that it hasn't been a POE?

[Adam]

Maybe it is, but they can't list it in the changes.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by rockchalk jhawk

Rough play isn't a POE this year? Isn't this the first year in quite a few (i seem to remember it from at least the last 3 or 4) that it hasn't been a POE?

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Maybe it is, but they can't list it in the changes.

But they can AND DO list the POEs just below the changes. What page were you looking at?

2009-10 POINTS OF EMPHASIS
1. Traveling
2. Closely guarded
3. Three-seconds
4. Block/Charge
5. Free-throw administration

[rockchalk jhawk]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

But they can AND DO list the POEs just below the changes. What page were you looking at?

2009-10 POINTS OF EMPHASIS
1. Traveling
2. Closely guarded
3. Three-seconds
4. Block/Charge
5. Free-throw administration

Exactly. So back to my original question. When was the last time rough play WASN'T a POE?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

But they can AND DO list the POEs just below the changes. What page were you looking at?

2009-10 POINTS OF EMPHASIS
1. Traveling
2. Closely guarded
3. Three-seconds
4. Block/Charge
5. Free-throw administration

I was being facetious.

[Brad]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

That's not an edit, it's a rule change and I don't like it. It's designed, I'm sure, to slow down the reverse pivot move from the second spot.

1. I wish they'd quit hiding rule changes as editorial changes.
2. This is too nitpicky, IMO.

This doesn't say that you have to put the other foot back -- just that one foot has to be near the line.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Brad

This doesn't say that you have to put the other foot back -- just that one foot has to be near the line.

I know, and that's a change in the rule that i don't particularly like.

[Nevadaref]

The NFHS changes were posted this morning. They weren't up last night. I looked.
===============================
My thoughts:

"During state championship series contests,..."

What does that mean? Does the inclusion of the word series mean that every postseason game gets included in this rule because they are all part of the series which leads to the state championship game?

Is it only the final X number of teams that gather at the last playing site? Some states bring 16 teams to one location, some only eight, mine only four, and probably some just match the final two somewhere.

I wish that the NFHS has specified ONLY the State FINAL.

Also, I agree with Snaqs about the FT lane space foot placement (9-1-3g). Why place some arbitrary restriction on these players that is difficult to enforce consistently. How near is near? Two inches? One foot? Six inches?

That is clearly a new ruling and not an editorial change. Does the FT shooter also have to put at least one foot near the FT line when attempting the try or can he stand back near the top of the semi-circle?

BTW it looks as if someone finally took note of my posts about players in marked lane spaces being able to touch the floor inside the lane with their hands as long as their feet remain outside of the boundary and within the marked lane space. Being in push-up position along the lane is now illegal.
Is there any doubt that my mind was responsible for someone proposing 9-1-3d?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

NFHS 2008-09 R9-S1-3g: "A player occupying a marked lane space may not have either foot beyond the vertical plane of the outside edge of any lane boundary, or beyond the vertical plane of any edge of the space (2 inches by 36 inches) designated by a lane-space mark or beyond the vertical plane of any edge of the space (12 inches by 36 inches) designated by a neutral zone."


NFHS 2009-10 R9-S1-3g: Clarified that a player occupying a marked lane space must have one foot positioned near the outer edge of the free-throw lane line with the other foot positioned anywhere within the designated 36 inch lane space.


This change is just absolute nonsense.

MTD, Sr.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by shishstripes

Edited Rule: Clarified that it is a lane violation when you contact the floor, not when the plane has been broken.

That's not a clarification, that's a rule CHANGE.

A player occupying a marked lane space may not have either foot beyond the vertical plane of the outside edge of any lane boundary, or beyond the vertical plane of any edge of the space

Originally Posted by Brad

This doesn't say that you have to put the other foot back -- just that one foot has to be near the line.

What is near? One inch? Six inches? An incomplete rule CHANGE.