It's that time again (rule changes)

[Mark Padgett]

Originally posted by theshortbaldref
(And why six fouls???)

The theory is that, during the normal course of play, it is reasonable to expect that each player will foul once per half. Since there are 6 players on each team, that results in..........wait a minute - that's not right.

OK, I got it. Each team has one substitute per half. That's where you get six...........wait a minute - that's not right either.

Oh yeah, now I remember. There's six letters in "Naismith". No - wait.

OK, I give up.

[finnref]

Agree with elliminate coaches calling for time outs. Ok during dead balls and the clock stopped but NOT when clock running as after a made basket. the latter caused me some problems last year with watching the inbounding team gain bll control and looking for the right coach.

[Jim Dixon]

I'll trot out my perennial suggestion to add the shot clock at the HS varsity level.

True, a mercy rule may help do the same thing, but there are also times when a relatively close game is occurring but there is a stall tactic being used -- which would go away in some instances if a shot clock were being used.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally posted by Jim Dixon
I'll trot out my perennial suggestion to add the shot clock at the HS varsity level.

Jim - with schools cutting class days, laying off teachers and increasing class sizes due to lack of funding, I don't think you'll see a mandate to make them buy shot clocks.

BTW - I don't like any "mercy rules", unless they are just to stop backcourt guarding when the spread gets to a certain point. I don't support running clock due to a point spread because I feel the kids deserve to play the proper time regardless of the score.

[oatmealqueen]

Originally posted by Mark Padgett

Jim - with schools cutting class days, laying off teachers and increasing class sizes due to lack of funding, I don't think you'll see a mandate to make them buy shot clocks.

BTW - I don't like any "mercy rules", unless they are just to stop backcourt guarding when the spread gets to a certain point. I don't support running clock due to a point spread because I feel the kids deserve to play the proper time regardless of the score.

Mark,
I both like and dislike the "mercy rule".
Positives: Kids on the losing end of a lopsided score aren't standing around being humiliated for any longer than needed. Less than sportsmanlike coaches are not given the freedom to run up huge scores.
Negatives: Kids do not get to play 32 minutes of "real" ball.
I don't like the rule as presently written. It could be "tweaked" to make it different, or coaches could do the right thing, not run up scores, and we wouldn't have to worry.

[BigJoe]

I would like to see the rules regarding out of bounds plays to mirror the NCAA. All reaching through the out of bounds plane is not allowed. It is a pain to have to decide if the ball has been released for the throw in or not under Fed rules. I don't think the AP should be changed. If you rewarded the defense for tying up the ball it would turn all rebounding situations where the ball is brought down into a "hack-fest". I wouldn't have any problems with adjusting the free throw rules. I don't think there should be a mercy rule for varsity ball, but should be for all lower levels. Maybe institute an officials mercy rule where we have the option of letting the coaches finish the game as officials and we coach. This would be allowed twice during the season so I caution you as officials to not use this trump card too early!!!!

[Rich]

Chuck -- I remember the NCAA experiment now. You're right, it was a disaster trying to determine if there was team control when the ball was tied up.

At the NCAA level, they should just go back to the jump ball. Even varsity boys wouldn't be a big deal jumping every held ball. At lower levels and for varsity girls it would be a disaster.

As far as other changes I would make -- I would eliminate quarters and play 16:00 halves. I know some states already do that. I would also eliminate the coach-calling-timeouts, but that's been mentioned already.

I didn't watch much of the tournament. I'm not eligible for postseason since I just moved here (and I won't be eligible for at least 3 more years).

Rich

[ChuckElias]

Just my two cents. I'd like to see:

1) POI on technicals.
2) Team control foul.
3) Coach calling TO only with dead ball and clock stopped.
4) Players may enter on the release during FTs. I don't care what changes they make to the number or positioning of players along the lane to make this work. But waiting for the shot to hit stinks.


Things that would be nice, but I don't really care that much:
1) Mercy rule.
2) Halves, instead of quarters.
3) Shot clock.

NCAA should eliminate the possession arrow. Most games would still have only 3 or 4 jump balls anyway.

Just my thoughts.

Chuck

[DrakeM]

Why halves instead of quarters? What advantage? Or just personal preference?

[ChuckElias]

There are a couple reasons I enjoy working halves instead of quarters. First, there are generally two fewer TO's taken during the game. Since there's no "mandatory" TO at the 8:00 mark, if you're in a good flow, it just continues. In MA, we make up for that by giving each team one extra TO per game. But a coach rarely uses all his TOs and it's even rarer for both coaches to use all their TOs. So, in almost every game, it cuts down on the TO stoppages.

Second, it eliminates two "last second shot" situations from every game. Not that it's a huge issue in the sport, but you don't have to communicate who has the last shot every 8 minutes. Removes two chances for error from the game.

I guess that's about it. Other than, of course, it's just what I'm used to now.

Chuck

[RecRef]

My rants/changes needed

Only put into POEs what people are willing to call. I’m sick of seeing hand checks, forearms in the back, and moving screens (contact) that are not called. Not called because someone thinks it does not meet the “Tower Philosophy.” Yes, they are not moving towards the basket because the hand/arm is stopping them. The repeated off ball use of the hand or arm in the back to stop a players movement is wrong. The book should just come out and say that if it is not called, the ref is in the wrong, period.

If we are going to quote/use the “Tower Philosophy” make it part of the rules book and case book.

Think about all the aspects of situations before you write something about it. One case in point is the change to the elbow rule this year. Good change but I have seen too many times this year where the intentional throwing of the elbow, with no contact, is either not call or is call a violation. Why, because the explanation of the change does not cover situations other than rebounding or clearing an area.

What is the call when the ball is released on an inbounds pass directly to the court and the defender reaches across the line and hits it? How long before the NF addresses the situation in a case book play? We have a case book situation where A1 and A2 are both OOB, and A1 throws to A2, B1 reaches across ant hits the ball and it is a T. Why can’t we have a ruling on a direct pass?

How about the old one foot in and one foot OOB on a block question? How about some guidance on it?

Offer a combined rules book and case book. Have a rule and then have a case play(s) right after the rule. Give it a 2 or 3 year trial to see if it sells.

Allow pre game dunks. So what if a kid dunks before the game? I always look at this as being a spiteful NCAA based rule. “Boys and girls, we are going to give you the dunk back during the game but you still can’t do it before the game - because we say so!”

Do away with the one and one. Shoot 2 shots on all non shooting fouls 7 and over. Even think about 3 shots at 11 and above. Maybe coaches will start teaching defense.

Now where is my medication?

[cmckenna]

Originally posted by RecRef
Offer a combined rules book and case book. Have a rule and then have a case play(s) right after the rule. Give it a 2 or 3 year trial to see if it sells.

I like this one... I have always felt the same way... show the rule, show an example...

Originally posted by RecRef
Allow pre game dunks. So what if a kid dunks before the game? I always look at this as being a spiteful NCAA based rule. “Boys and girls, we are going to give you the dunk back during the game but you still can’t do it before the game - because we say so!”

This one is there for safety both for the players and the equipment. Imagine waiting for a rim to be replaced before you can start your game because some clown was fooling around and bent it. At least in the game the dunk would be under some control, in warmups...well... you know how kids are...

[Refneck]

Rule change:
Make the "jump-stop" illegal. IMO, the only reason it's legal is the semantics of how the rule involving the end of the dribble is written. It think it goes against the spirit of the traveling rule.

I also agree with getting rid of the quarter system. Two 16 minute halves would give the game a better flow.

POE's:
Traveling! Watch a game at the HS or college level and notice how many travels are let go. Especially the one preceding a break away dunk. Happens entirely too much.

Hanging on the rim. We have let the whole idea of "he was under me" go way too far. We let kids hang on the rim all the time now. It's got to stop.

[Int]

A couple of FIBA rules that NFHS should look at trying:
Substitutions only allowed before the first free throw.
After a violation, the team that violates is not permitted to make a substitution unless the team throwing the ball in also makes a substitution.
Bonus penalty -- two shots starting on 8th foul of the half.
No bonus on team offensive.

[stan-MI]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mark Padgett

BTW - I don't like any "mercy rules", unless they are just to stop backcourt guarding when the spread gets to a certain point. I don't support running clock due to a point spread because I feel the kids deserve to play the proper time regardless of the score.

I know of no Michigan official, athletic director or coach who isn't begging for a return of the mercy rule (running clock in the second half after a team gets a 40-pt. lead). Neither the winning team nor the losing team has any fun or learns anything in a blowout of this magnitude.