When did in-game dunking become legal?
 

While reading through the 2010-2012 Basketball Handbook, I noticed on page 13 talking about the history of the rules changes that in 1967 it was illegal to dunk during the game. When was that rule reversed as I cannot find a passage saying it is now legal?

Keep reading.

Peace

I read a bit more closely and noticed that regulation was only in effect for 9 years: 1967-1976.

Reading through some of the rules changes that have happened, there are some that, I feel, need to be re-instated.

Been reading through the handbook some more, specifically the history of rules, and noticed several that used to be in effect that have been either disallowed or changed.

One of those that changed was that when subs reported to the table, that they have to report their number as well as the number they are replacing. However that rule got overturned. Thinking to the newer scoreboards out there that require player numbers, should that rule of been reversed?

What other old rules do you feel need to be reinstated?

I'm not sure what the point would be requiring a player to tell who he's replacing. Seems like all anyone would have to do is...see the number of the person being replaced. Even with scoreboards today being able to show each player's number and stats, the only thing official on the scoreboard is the time.

Put it this way, they don't require this at the NBA level, where they would care a lot more about this kind of stuff.

Am just trying to get conversation started concerning what old rules would be good ideas to be reinstated.

Thankfully not all scoreboards show the players in the game, at the HS level.

How about the rule that the fouling player has to raise their hand?

No.

The one that said only players on the court could be granted a timeout request.

Coaches Will Give This Up When You Take It From Their Cold, Dead Hands ...
 

Bingo. Pick a prize from the top shelf.

Don't really see any need for this. What if a player didn't know he committed a foul? What if the wrong player raised their hand? If I put air in the whistle for a foul, I don't need a player to raise his hand.

Quite frankly, I think that rule is one of the stupidest ones I read, and I'm way too young to ever have played with the rule or have to officiate a game with it.

I first started playing about the time the rule disappeared, and I don't recall it really doing anything productive. I do, however, recall officials enforcing it in my Jr. High games.

So besides only active players requesting timeouts, what other changes to the rules from old would you like to see implemented?

Which timeout length is better? 20 sec. or 30 sec.?

I see that NFHS keeps discussing the idea of adopting the shot clock, however they keep dismissing due to cost issues, among other things.

20 vs. 30 second timeouts...save at most 20 seconds, so that's a none issue to me. I don't know when NF decided we needed to be the uniform police (maybe it's always been that way), but if there was a time we weren't concern about matching undershirts and all that stupid stuff, I'd vote to go back to the former way.

As far as a shot clock, I've always been one that has said the shot clock should be implemented...and mandate it in 5-10 years like they did with the white jerseys (it'd probably have to be closer to 10 years).

Concerning undershirts, there were rule adoptions in 1984 & 1996. It seems in the past 11 years is when the majority of the "Uniform Police" rules came into effect. It surprises me however that the "No jewelry" rule has been in effect since 1977, yet at least once a year it needs to be mentioned.

NFHS is complaining about the cost of having to add shot clocks and one additional table official, yet there are schools getting new scoreboards every 2-5 years. (Example: though not HS, Washington State University has just put in a new scoreboard that costs $3 million, though the scoreboards in use were installed in 1992)

Seriously? Your example is a major university in a BCS conference replacing a 20 year old scoreboard? Seriously?

I have yet to see a truly compelling argument for forcing the schools to buy, maintain, and operate extra equipment, regardless of how marginal the cost might be.