4-23 Clarified that in order for a player to establish legal guarding position, both feet must be touching the “playing court.”

Puts an end to the age-old question "can a defensive player stand with 1 foot OOB", doesn't it?

Depends on whether the OOB portion of the hardwood is considered part of the playing court or not.

I noticed that too, but I'm not sure if it helps or not. Does it?

ah, I see..so you're saying it applies specifically not to where you're standing, but to how you're standing. Could be. Anyway, gives us something new to argue about....errrr...discuss.

No, at least that's not what I meant to say. I only mean that having two feet on the "playing court" doesn't seem to be any better-defined than having two feet on the "floor". It might be reasonably argued that the OOB portion of the hardwood is part of the playing court, since you have to stand on it to make a legal throw-in.

If that's true, then you can have a foot OOB and still have LGP. If it's not true, then you can't have LGP while any part of your body is touching OOB. I'm just not sure the new wording helps in the debate, that's all.

Oops.
 

Rule 1-1

Re: Oops.
 

Excellent. The case is closed.

Re: Re: Oops.
 

no, no, ignore Mick, that's just a nit! we could have gotten this thread up to 5 pages, easily! :p

I think that someone on the Rules Committee must be reading this forum.Just off the top of my head,we have had discussions on:
1)definition of the "bench area"
2)whether a team can request a line-up or not after mass substitutions.
3)"legal guarding position" on and partially off the court.
4)signal for kicked ball
5)no warning signal on 30 seconds to replace disqualified player

The big cheaters!!!

I not going to buy that until they answer #6 with a case book play.

6) A1 is in-bounding the ball, after the ball is released directly towards the court, A) B1 reaches across the end/side line and hits the ball before it crosses over any part of the line. B) B1 strikes the ball while part of it is still over the vertical plane of the line. Ruling: _ _ _

RecRef,
Sorry!
You have to wait another year.
This forum hasn't exhibited enough interest in that yet.
<hr>

Whatever Jurassic Ref says works for me.

Whack! :D

5-11-3 Clarified that a 30-second time-out may be charge to a team for requesting review of a correctable error, if that is the only type of time-out that remains, when no correction is made.

Someone should tell the NFHS that this is not a clarification. It is a change! Previously, as Chuck said, Whack! :D