One comment, one question.

First of all, I like the new line-up. I seem to be the only one, but we've had a week now of using it, and I think it accomplishes the purposes, as I understand them. Defense is getting quite a few more rebounds, and especially the less skilled teams when playing against better teams. Also, the shooter isn't getting jostled around as much. I've done some JV girls, Var girls, and JV boys, and I like it.

Of course, it takes some explaining. Everyone keeps thinking we should be clearing the bottom slots, next to the basket. And I had one coach get sort of snippy about it. But basically, it's been good.

Now the question. If Team B chooses not to occupy one or both of the slots that are now the closest allowed to the shooter, can A take them? I've been holding them empty, thinking I'd heard that somewhere, but I had a couple of doubting looks from dubious players.

Juulie - the wording of the new rule does not mention any changes in the way the other slots are assigned. Therefore, team A can take them if B doesn't want them, the same way B can take the second ones if A doesn't want them.

Yes, Howard just read it, and he called to let me know. I can't seem to get away with anything!!

I haven't seen the exact wording of the new rule. If someone could post this that would be nice.

Under the caveat that,when they do line up,the defense is limited to a maximum total of 4 slots(bottom 2 mandatory),and the shooting team is limited to a total of two slots on the lane.Neither team can slip any additional players in,if the other team doesn't bother to fill their allotted spots.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Jun 1st, 2003 at 02:00 AM]

I don't think that you'll see the exact wording until the new rulebooks and casebooks come out,Nevada.All the NFHS has given out so far,that I know of,is the information and explanation on their website.

http://www.nfhs.org/Sports/basketball_comments.htm

If this is true, then Juules may not be incorrect afterall. Padgett's post made it sound like he had seen the new rulebook or at least the wording of the rule, not just the comments. I don't see how he and this guy Howard can tell her that she was wrong when we simply don't know yet whether or not the NFHS is going to incorporate the NCAA women's slot assignment into the new rule. She may turn out to be right. Right now, we have one of those questions whose answer is (D) Not enough information.
We are also running a summer league here, and I would like to use the new FT administration during these games so that the coaches and players know about it and get used to it before the upcoming season. However, not knowing for sure whether or not the spaces are assigned to one team only makes me think that it may not be a good idea to use it in summer play, since it may actually cause more confusion to do it one way now and later find out that the rule is the other way for the regular season.

If this is true, then Juules may not be incorrect afterall. Padgett's post made it sound like he had seen the new rulebook or at least the wording of the rule, not just the comments. I don't see how he and this guy Howard can tell her that she was wrong when we simply don't know yet whether or not the NFHS is going to incorporate the NCAA women's slot assignment into the new rule. She may turn out to be right. Right now, we have one of those questions whose answer is (D) Not enough information.
[/B][/QUOTE]Naw,MP and Howard had it right.If the offense or defense doesn't fill one of their allotted spots,the other team can take it(except for the bottom 2).The only restrictions are the totals of 4 and 2,and nobody in the two top slots.There's more info in the new "points of emphasis' on the FED website.I shoulda put this in before,too.
Mr.Padgett may dick around a lot,but he do knows the rulz.:D
See "F-3A-Lane Space Requirements" in below:
http://www.nfhs.org/Sports/basketball_emphasis.htm

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Jun 1st, 2003 at 07:06 AM]

What Howard said, I think, is that if B didn't want that upper space, anyone could have it. By upper space, I mean the second one down from the shooter, the third one up from the basket. The description on the website looks as though A3 could slide up from the middle space, but A4 can't step in. Wording is "Reduced the number of players permitted on marked lane spaces during free throws (not including the free-thrower) to four defensive and two offensive players, with the lane spaces closest to the free-throw line (and the shooter) remaining vacant."

What Howard said, I think, is that if B didn't want that upper space, anyone could have it. By upper space, I mean the second one down from the shooter, the third one up from the basket. [/B][/QUOTE]If Howard meant that any one of the two A players allowed on the lane lines can slide into that space,if B doesn't want to fill it,then Howard is right.Team A still can't put any more players anywhere along the lane lines than the maximum of 2 that they are legally allowed to have there.Less than 2,but not more.

That's the way I understand that the new rule is supposed to be administered.

If Howard meant that any one of the two A players allowed on the lane lines can slide into that space,if B doesn't want to fill it,then Howard is right.Team A still can't put any more players anywhere along the lane lines than the maximum of 2 that they are legally allowed to have there.Less than 2,but not more.

That's the way I understand that the new rule is supposed to be administered. [/B][/QUOTE]

I'm not sure, now that we're being so specific, that Howard was saying that. But not to fear. He'll read this and call me. When he does, I'll report back. Howard is the go-to guy for rules and interpretations, so he gets the last word.

My conversations with a member of the rules committee left me in doubt also.
Last year my state was an experimental state and we were told to allow the the teams to occupy the empty slots as long as the numerical lineup was followed (4 defensive and 2 offensive) and not exceeeded.
However, this year I have been told the slots are locked and it is allowed??????????
I am waiting for the books and an official ruling from our state in the meantime, I am allowing the movement to empty slots as long as we have the proscribed number of defensive v offensive players set.

Clear as mud, wouldn't you say?

Here is the wording directly from the press release on the NF website:

"Beginning with the 2003-04 season, the number of players permitted on marked lane spaces during free throws (not including the free-throw shooter) will be six – four defensive players and two offensive players. The lane spaces closest to the free-throw line (and the shooter) must remain vacant.

The first marked lane spaces (ones adjacent to the end line) shall be occupied by opponents of the free-throw shooter, unless the resuming-of-play procedure is in effect. The second marked lane spaces on each side may be occupied by teammates of the free-throw shooter, and the third marked lane spaces may be occupied by opponents of the free-throw shooter."

Notice the diffenence between the use of the words "shall" and "may". This supports what we have been saying, unless you interpret that language (combined with the statement that there will be four defensive and two offensive players "permitted") as meaning that if a player entitled to a space doesn't take it, it must remain vacant. The word "may" indicates the taking of a space is not required for those spaces, unlike in the NBA.

BTW - "Howard" is Howard Mayo, commissioner of Portland Basketball Officials Assn. (PBOA) and a former member of the NF rules committee.

Following is the direct quote from the new POE's on the NFHS website(I gave the link before):-from "F-3A":

"If the offense desires the second spaces,they may have them.If the defense desires the third spaces,they may have them.If a player entitled to the second or third space does not occupy that space,AN OPPONENT MAY BE WITHIN THE SPACE(within the number limitations,four defense and two offense).The fourth lane spaces(nearest the free throw shooter)may not be occupied."

Pretty straightforward,I think.

I agree -- the shooter's team may only have two players on the lane. If there are only three defenders on the lane, shooter's team doesn't get to add a third.

I still haven't heard from Howard.

Sounds to me like we need to get Howard registered on the board, so we can get his assistance first-hand! Come on, Howard, I know you're reading this!! :D

Chuck

Apparently we now have bi-costal support for Howard to join the board! I'm all for him and Dave (either the real one or any personas) to join! :)

I'm not bi-coastal! Not that there's anything wrong with that. . .

http://tomsquotes.amhosting.net/sitc.../legscross.jpg

You've got one of his personas already -- in my opinion, it's plenty!

Thursday night at our first summer league game, it was me explaining to the officials! When I first heard of the rule change, I remembered a fast-break play out of opponents' free throws that I learned at a clinic. I never used it in the past because it requires putting two players at midcourt, and if I did that under the old rule, we'd give up too many rebounds off the misses. So we walk through the new play at the school before we head off to summer league. The first free-throw lineup, we just put our two in the two required spaces nearest the end line and our point guard in the third spot up on one side. Of course, the opponents fill up four other spots with the rest of their team and we have no one to box two of them out. I try to explain it on the fly but the officials are looking at me funny. At halftime I told them about the new rule, and the one said, "I'm sure we'll find out about the new rules soon."

When and how does the info get disseminated in your area? I want to play in summer league by the same rules we will play by in the season--the purpose of summer league is preparation!

Some summer leagues play by "last year's rules"; some play by "next year's rules."

If it's the latter, a summary of the new rules is usually included with the other league rules (running clock, nobody fouls out; no free throws, etc.)

The summer league I'm assigning for got the info off this board -- via Mark Padgett. But I'm also working in another league that is using the new free throw line-up and I couldn't say where they got it. Probably from Howard.

Juulie - I think the coach meant where do we get the information on rules changes in the first place. We get them off the NF website. Usually, they are released about this time of year. Anyone can access the site at nfhs.org.

Gee - here I am representing I know what a coach meant. I need my meds again.

Well here it is: The Official Word as spoken by Howard Mayo. I got this e-mail just a few minutes ago, and I'm pasting it in word-for-word.

Juulie:

I have read several posting on the 'official's form' and would like to offer the official interpretation as set down by the National Federation.

There has been no change in regards to who may occupy marked lane spaces with the exception that under the 2003-04 rule, players in marked lane spaces shall be limited to the maximum of 4 defensive and two offensive players in spaces 1,2 & 3 with the top marked lane space(Closest to the shooter) remaining vacant.

The lane space adjacent to the endline shall be occupied by opponents of the free thrower - #2 lane space may be occupied by the offense - #3 lane space may be occupied by the defense - #4 lane space (top) shall remain vacant.

The only lane space that must be occupied is the lower space adjacent to the endline. The other two lane spaces are optional and players do not have to occupy these spaces.

Examples: Offense chooses not to occupy #2 lane space - Defense may occupy.
Defense does not choose to occupy #3 lane space - Offense may
occupy.

Keep in mind that regardless of how many lane spaces are open, there can be only a maximum of 4 - defensive and 2 - offensive players on the lane line with the top space vacant.

It is legal to have only the lower space occupied with #2 and #3 spaces vacant.

Because the top space must remain vacant, if for some reason a player(s) occupy the top space and the thrower has the ball, that player has committed a violation. Officials should make sure, prior to presenting the ball to the shooter, that the top space is vacant and the bottom space is occupied by the defense.

Under last year's rule, 82% of missed free throws were gathered by the defense. It will be interesting to see if the new alignment will increase the percentage for the defense
There will be several new case book plays to cover the new rule when the case books come out in early August.
Hope this clears up any confusion.


Just remember, you heard it here first!!

Juulie & Howard,

With all due respect, there is no way that the 82% figure is correct. Perhaps it is so in boys' basketball, but in girls' varsity & JV basketball it is not. The first year after the change to crossing into the lane on the rim instead of the release, the varsity team I coached with rebounded 71% of our own free throw misses (29% defense), and rebounded just 38% of our opponents' misses.

Although this change will allow the defense to get a higher percentage of misses than in the past, it will not make the correct things enough to make up for that the old rule change from rim to release.

The NFHS should've followed the NCAA women's rule. The problem is that without being allowed to move until the ball hits the rim, those two spaces nearest the endline are at a disadvantage. Very rarely do free throw misses kick away at a 90-degree angle, and that is the only rebound those front-space players can get to.

Perhaps with the leaping ability in the boys' game, this is not such a disparity. But my experiences watching some boys' games this year is that they "anticipate" the ball contacting the rim and the officials are loathe to call a violation when the player entering is not far in advance of the ball contacting the rim.

Coach, it's been my experience that 81% is about right for organized boys/mens ball at & above HS. I don't have enough girls experience to comment on how close this is for them. Do you use the NFHS line up or the NCAAW line up? It seems a 30% defense success rate is kinda low.

You may be right about the 82% figure. I have no idea, Howard will call me if he wants to discuss it.

But I do think the new arrangement helps the defense a little. It seems from just this weekend that there were more defense rebounds. It seems reasonable, though, that the improvement would be even greater if we went to NCAA. It would also save several very inane conversations with coaches.

This does it for me. Thanks, JR.