NFHS Rule Changes ???
 

We had our first local board meeting a few nights ago. Also in attendance was a member of our state high school athletic governing organization, who is also on the NFHS rules committee. We were invited to suggest any rule changes. Here's what I offered:

Jump Balls
I go back to before the alternating possession arrow, when we had jump balls to start each period, for each held ball situation, and even for closely guarded situations, at three different circles on the court, with a lot of different players involved. Back then, because we had so many jump balls, coaches actually had jump ball plays, depending on which circle, and the probability of winning, or losing the tap. These coaches knew the various rules regarding jump balls, and taught these rules to their players. Officials, again, because there were so many jump balls, knew all the jump ball rules like the back of their hand, and good officials actually spent time practicing tosses by tossing the ball up through a basket from below, usually before preseason scrimmages. Now that we have only one jump ball a game, plus overtimes, coaches don't really know the rules, and since they don't know the rules, their players don't know the rules. It’s the same with officials. Now that we have only one jump ball a game, plus overtimes, officials, myself included, don't know the various jump ball rules as well now as we did before the advent of alternating possessions. And these rules aren't easy to understand, especially when you have to apply them in a split second, and only get the opportunity to apply them a few dozen times each season, half the time as the tosser, and the other half of the time as the official observing the jump ball. Jumpers, players on the circle, players off the circle. Official ready to toss, official tosses, ball is tapped. Open spots on the circle, filled spots on the circle. Moving onto the circle, moving off of the circle. Today, it seems like the two tallest kids get to jump, a few shorter kids match up on the circle, and a few more match up off the circle. The official throws up the toss, not with the same skill that I saw many years ago, and the other official stands back and hopes that nothing "odd", or "weird", happens, that is, "odd enough”, or "weird enough”, to be immediately recognized as a violation. Over the past 100 years, we’ve gone from jump balls after every basket; to jump balls to start each period, for each held ball situation, and for closely guarded situations, at three different circles on the court; to a single jump ball at the center circle to start the game, plus overtimes, with alternating possessions after that. I think that the next logical progression is to start the game with a coin toss, like they do in soccer, football, and probably a few other sports. Or let the visitors get to go on offense first, like in baseball, or softball.

Coaches Requesting Timeouts
Coaches should not be allowed to request timeouts during live ball situations. Over the past several years there have been a few points of emphasis regarding coaches calling timeouts during live ball situations, but this hasn’t made the enforcement of this rule any easier. A common situation is where a player is trapped along a boundary, often in a corner, is about to turnover the ball, or is about to be caught in a held ball situation, or is about to commit a five second violation, and the coach requests a timeout to maintain possession of the ball. As officials, we’re watching for fouls, traveling, boundary lines, counting five seconds, etc., a very difficult situation to begin with, and now we hear, usually from behind us, “time out”. We have to make sure that the request came from the head coach, not an assistant coach, or from a parent sitting behind the team bench, and check to make sure that the ball is being held, or dribbled, by a player from that head coach’s team, before we grant the request. Either go back to the old rule only allowing players holding, or dribbling, the ball to request a timeout, or only allow coaches to request timeouts during dead ball situations, including during the dead ball period immediately after a made basket.

Free Throw Mechanics
I may be a little fuzzy on this, my manuals only go back fourteen years, I've been doing this for twenty-nine years, and a few years ago we switched from NFHS mechanics, to IAABO mechanics, but this is what I recall. Many, many, years ago, during free throws, we may have been responsible for only our side of the lane. I know for sure that once we became responsible for the opposite side of the lane, we were responsible for the entire opposite side of the lane, and no longer, in any way, responsible for our side of the lane. Now as the lead, we have the first lane space on our side, and the entire opposite side of the lane. As the trail, we have the opposite side of the lane, except the first lane space. I wish the NFHS, or IAABO, would allow us to just watch one entire side, and not have us watch "fractions" of a side, and I don't care if it's the entire opposite side, like we did a few years ago, or the entire same side, like we may have done a very long time ago.

I agree with you on coaches requesting TO's. What happened to the players learning the situations & skill of requesting time outs. I have had several coaches remind their kids before the game that he/she was the only one that was calling time outs. Don't look for this rule or jump ball rules to change any time soon.

I'll Come Down Off My Soapbox, Eventually ...
 

You're right. I'm not holding my breath on these two, but I'm still passionate about these two changes and I think that they will improve officiating. Hey, someone has got to beat dead horses, or they wouldn't have the expression, "beat a dead horse".

Nowadays since there are so many alternating possession throw ins the coaches know all the corresponding rules and teach them to their players:rolleyes:

Jump balls -- E.G. "guard oriented" teams disadvantaged
 

There often were big enough height differences between the jumpers that the smaller jumper would not even try to jump. It also took a bit longer to get everyone positioned around the jump circle.
Back in the days before the possession arrow, there were not as many woman games--where the held ball is generally more prevalent--which would add even more "positioning" time.

Letting coaches request time out should go, for all the reasons stated.

As for jump balls to start the game, keep it. It means the game begins with competition, not with a coin toss. It's a much better opening to the competition than a throw-in. I'd restore it at halftime as well.

If officials, coaches and players aren't straight on the rules or the mechanics then they need to brush up.

Free Throw coverage
 

I agree with you on the Free Throw coverage. From the POE and the mechanics change, it appears that the NFHS is more concerned with being able to see the lane violation than being able to referee the rebounding action. As lead looking across the lane you are straghtlined for that rebound foul. Have no idea if player was pushed from behind or if he himself jumped forward.
I think the NCAA mechanic of same side is a better situation. Rather miss a lane violation (how many of these actually get called?) than a rebounding foul.

You obviously don't work in girls basketball or junior high ball. :cool:

That's insane.

The Lead has no business calling a push from behind anyway. That's why we have a trail and a center.

The only benefit of changing the held ball rule would be that officials would be more likely to let the kids play through them.

It's still not worth it.

Not to hijack a thread, but a question about this statement.

Last week I was doing a GV Fall League game (prep for season). Gives me a good opportunity to practice 3-person and we have evaluators/trainers from our Association.

Late in 2nd half. I am T, L calls foul underneath on B3. Ball goes in basket and we'll be shooting one. As L and I switch, B coach tells me as I go by after A shoots foul shot - if ball goes in he wants a TO and if it misses and his team gets the ball he wants an immediate TO. Got it.

Ball misses, his team rebounds, I TWEET, TO B. I do all the necessary business, report to table, etc.

After the game, as part of the critique, I was asked about the situation. I explained it as above. I was told not to do it that way.

Evaluator - “What if you blow it dead and the coach says he never said that?”

Me – “Well, then I put the ball back in play quickly.”

Evaluator – “Let the coach announce it to the gym so there is no question.”

Me – “Got it.”

I was told to tell the coach - "Coach, I understand, but I need you to request the timeout so everyone hears it. Either after the ball goes through or when your team gets possession."

I understand the rationale. Thoughts? Is this how you do it? Seems to me there are plenty of times when a coach requests a timeout only to one official and there is no need for this - but, as I said, I do understand the point.

There are two schools of thought on this. One is to tell the coach you'll watch for it, but he'll need to request it when the time is appropriate. The other is to recognize the situation and not play little games with the coach.

The first is more supportable by rule, but the 2nd can avoid unnecessary issues. I really don't see any risk with granting the TO, but I suppose it's there in theory.

Bottom line is, once again, just to do as the Romans do.

I would say, that if you're going to go with the 2nd, and the coach recants at the last second, you probably have to give it to him at that point or he has benefited from playing you. I tend to lean towards making him request when the time is appropriate in case he changes his mind for some reason.

Ask him for a rule reference for this. I know it sounds like picking nits, and I understand his rationale for not doing it the way it was handled, but serioiusly, why encourage something at the local level that may get frowned on at the state level or vice versa. It only leads to confusion.

Yeah, I agree there is no need to make him "announce it to the gym." We accept quiet timeout requests all the time. My rationale is to make him request when appropriate, but make sure you're watching him if you can if you know he's going to request it.

Agreed, the lead has no business and no factual basis for making that foul call - so who is going to make it, given the current mechanics? The mechanics are the same for the lead in both the two man and three man game. In the 3 man game C is looking at shooter and opposite lane. T would be looking at the entire picture, but probably focusing on his side of the lane for rebounding fouls (the same side C is looking at). Lead is still left straightlined with little help.

Hence, the mechanic should be changed to observing same side - focus needs to be on getting fouls and perhaps missing a "technical" violation. NFHS seems very concerned with rough play on FT rebounds, but the mechanic doesn't help.