New Rule Survey

[Scrapper1]

Ok, here's my second try at the poll question. Vote for as many as you think are warranted.

[Scrapper1]

Hey, it worked!!

[grunewar]

I'm gonna take a poll as to whether or not I like the wording of these questions!

[Scrapper1]

Sorry about the wording on some of the choices. The site only allows a certain number of characters in each possible answer.

I'm curious why some people would NOT be in favor of playing in halves by state adoption?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Sorry about the wording on some of the choices. The site only allows a certain number of characters in each possible answer.

I'm curious why some people would NOT be in favor of playing in halves by state adoption?

Isn't that done already?

[Welpe]

Nice poll Scrappy.

Good idea, Scrappy.

[Scrapper1]

I neglected to mention that these are among the actual rule proposals that will be discussed and voted on by the NFHS Rules Committee in a couple weeks. They're not just things I'm suggesting. (I had mentioned this in the original thread, but i messed up the poll part, so I had to start over and forgot to put it back in.)

Any discussion of the merit of these proposals is welcome and won't hurt my feelings

[refprof]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

I neglected to mention that these are among the actual rule proposals that will be discussed and voted on by the NFHS Rules Committee in a couple weeks. They're not just things I'm suggesting.

So, what rule changes are being voted on?

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by refprof

So, what rule changes are being voted on?

The proposals in the poll in this thread will be voted on by the Rules Committee. Sorry if I was unclear about that.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

I'm curious why some people would NOT be in favor of playing in halves by state adoption?

As one who did not vote for it, I just don't think it's necessary or even helpful. In the end, I really wouldn't care either way; I'm just not a fan of change for the sake of change, and that's how I see that one.

I vote for 2:

1. allowing the sleeves as long as they conform to the same restrictions as wrist and head bands.
2. TC on a throw-in. How they word it doesn't matter to me, as long as the rule is made similar to the NCAA. First, it would mean fewer confused officials when they come down from college. Second, it would be more consistent with the intent of the TCF rule.

[Indianaref]

Three are on my list: Team control on T/I's, Shooting sleave color and playing halves instead of quarters.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

As one who did not vote for it, I just don't think it's necessary or even helpful. In the end, I really wouldn't care either way; I'm just not a fan of change for the sake of change, and that's how I see that one.

Agree....it is a solution in search of a problem.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I vote for 2:

1. allowing the sleeves as long as they conform to the same restrictions as wrist and head bands.
2. TC on a throw-in. How they word it doesn't matter to me, as long as the rule is made similar to the NCAA. First, it would mean fewer confused officials when they come down from college. Second, it would be more consistent with the intent of the TCF rule.

Likewise on both.

Plus, I like the idea of allowing a few moments (20 seconds, for example) to remedy a blood situation. It just doesn't seem right that a player has to leave the game (or call a timeout) if someone else's blood gets on them.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Agree....it is a solution in search of a problem.


Likewise on both.

Plus, I like the idea of allowing a few moments (20 seconds, for example) to remedy a blood situation. It just doesn't seem right that a player has to leave the game (or call a timeout) if someone else's blood gets on them.

I can go with that, too. I like the idea. I was thinking of this as adding more burden rather than granting the team an "escape route," so to speak.

[26 Year Gap]

Guess we'll have to wait again for delayed return after a throw-in to be a violation instead of a T.

Shooting sleeve rule as is is farcical. We KNOW it is not for medical reasons.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap

Guess we'll have to wait again for delayed return after a throw-in to be a violation instead of a T.

Shooting sleeve rule as is is farcical. We KNOW it is not for medical reasons.

Agreed on both.

It seems the kids are really encouraged to lie on this. Either require docs, or just let it go and regulate the colors. I'd rather see the rule make them conform to T-shirt standards, but I'd be ok with head/wrist band standards.