NFHS Rules Changes Predictions/Rumors/Desires

[Nevadaref]

I predict that the wearing of full-length tights will be made legal and incorporated into the leg-sleeve/arm-sleeve rule for restrictions on colors.

Additionally, I'd like to see the NFHS:
a. make the shot clock an acceptable state adoption.

b. The entirety of the team control/player control/backcourt violation rules need to be rewritten. They are still a mess from the TC foul change about three seasons ago.

c. Clarify that fighting during a live ball is a flagrant PERSONAL foul and that fighting during a dead ball is a flagrant TECHNICAL foul.

d. Reporting mechanic: permit two-handed reporting for fouls.

[APG]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I predict that the wearing of full-length tights will be made legal and incorporated into the leg-sleeve/arm-sleeve rule for restrictions on colors.

Additionally, I'd like to see the NFHS:
a. make the shot clock an acceptable state adoption.

b. The entirety of the team control/player control/backcourt violation rules need to be rewritten. They are still a mess from the TC foul change about three seasons ago.

c. Clarify that fighting during a live ball is a flagrant PERSONAL foul and that fighting during a dead ball is a flagrant TECHNICAL foul.

d. Reporting mechanic: permit two-handed reporting for fouls.

I would agree that NFHS' rule changes will probably address some type of uniform "issue." So with that, I agree with your assessment there.

I also pretty much agree with what you'd like to see as far as A, B, and D go. I'd even go so far as to say I'd prefer the walk-and-talk when reporting, but that would just be getting greedy.

*edit*

I'd also support making the team control punch the signal for all "offensive fouls" (team and player control) and getting rid of the stupid hand behind the head mechanic. I'd also support making the fist on the hips signal for a block the official mechanic. The only reason I want NFHS to address this is for states that decide they want to be anal about using the weaker signals suggested by NFHS

I addition, as far as mechanics go, I want more signals added...hit to the head, and actual tripping signal...forearm...defender bringing the arms down an impending on the verticality of a shooter (I believe NCAA-M added the signal this past year). I'd also add signals like the "juggling" signal to indicate you travel because of no possession. I'm sure I've left a few out, but more signals for situations like this I'd like to see mechanics wise.

[JetMetFan]

*Since I live in both mechanics worlds, let me say walk & talk on fouls is wonderful. However, I think to do that it would be helpful to standardize where the calling official goes after a foul, i.e. table side. Some states do, some don't. If you're going to walk towards the table to give the numbers then walk away you might get an uptick in "BUZZ...Ref, what number was that?" If you're table side they just ask you sans horn.

*Nevada, I think some states will push back on making the shot-clock an acceptable choice if only because they don't want it at all.

*I think they'll adopt the NCAA contact guidelines and it makes sense. The logic behind it at the college level was we'd let the Tower Philosophy run wild, which is true. I think the same thing is happening at the HS level. You're going to get lots of howling from coaches and officials if the change is made but I found by mid-season in my GV/NCAAW games the kids adjusted. Those who hadn't were on the bench. Also, the kids who go on the play college ball are going to see the guidelines at the next level. If HS basketball is about teaching, this would be a teachable moment.

*Not covering a three-point attempt in my corner when working three-person is one of the toughest adjustments for me in a BV game. It doesn't make sense to essentially ignore something taking place right next to me. As for who covers the post, the T has first crack. The C has second crack, but C always has second crack so that's no different.

*If only NYC had a seat belt rule...(sigh)

[BillyMac]

Anybody remember this?

2014 NFHS Basketball Rules Questionnaire

Part I – Are These Changes Made Last Year Satisfactory

1. The use of electronic devices is permitted during the game.

2. A single visible manufacturer's logo/trademark/reference is permitted on the team jersey, not to exceed 2 1/4 square inches with no dimension more than 2 1/4 inches. The manufacturer's logo may be located no more than 5
inches below the shoulder seam on the front of the jersey, or 2 inches from the neckline on the back of the jersey; or in either side insert.

3. Leg compression sleeve was added to this rule to make its use consistent with the rule for wearing an arm compression sleeve. As with the arm compression sleeve, the leg compression sleeve must be white, beige, black or a single solid school color; must be the same color for each team member; and have only a single manufacturer’s logo. Leg compression sleeves must be worn for medical reasons.

4. A team shall not use a megaphone or any electronic communication device at courtside, or electronic equipment for voice communication with players on the court.

5. A team shall not use electronic audio and /or video devices to review a decision of the contest officials.

6. The head coach may enter the court in the situation where a fight may break out – or has broken out – to prevent the situation from escalating.

Part II – Observations – Have You Seen In Your Area?

1. Contact on the high screen(s).

2. Hedging the dribbler – contact in the perimeter off screens/dribble drives.

3. Arm bar in the post by the defender.

4. Officials not starting their count initially on closely guarded situations.

5. Officials moving too fast once call is made.

6. Officials not using proper mechanics.

7. The overuse of many different types of leg compression sleeves.

8. The spin move called as travel.

Part III – About Rules For 2014-15 – Would You Favor?

1. Allowing participants to wear tights.

2. Allowing the use of the "punch" signal for player-control foul as well as team-control foul.

3. Changing the number of time-outs to 3-30s and 2-60s.

4. Allowing the 3-point line to be moved out by 2 inches.

5. Playing with the 3-foot restricted-area arc to assist with calling block/charge on a secondary defender.

6. Allowing the use of a shot clock as a state adoption option.

7. Allowing the use of 18-minute halves as a state adoption option.

8. Adding more signals to the “signal chart.”

9. Not using the "stop the clock signal" on violations.

10. Clarifying when the clock starts on a missed free throw that hasn't been touched and is rolling on the floor.

11. Eliminating the opportunity for the head coach to call time-out. It would have to come from a player on the playing court.

12. Eliminating the requirement for players or coaches to verify that compression sleeves are worn for medical reasons.

13. Allowing players to move into the lane on the release rather than wait for the ball to contact the ring.

14. Clarifying language on what announcers can announce during the contest.

[HokiePaul]

2014 NFHS Basketball Rules Questionnaire...

Part III – About Rules For 2014-15 – Would You Favor? --

I'd favor these...

1. Allowing participants to wear tights.

2. Allowing the use of the "punch" signal for player-control foul as well as team-control foul.

3. Changing the number of time-outs to 3-30s and 2-60s.

6. Allowing the use of a shot clock as a state adoption option.

7. Allowing the use of 18-minute halves as a state adoption option.

9. Not using the "stop the clock signal" on violations.

12. Eliminating the requirement for players or coaches to verify that compression sleeves are worn for medical reasons.

13. Allowing players to move into the lane on the release rather than wait for the ball to contact the ring.

14. Clarifying language on what announcers can announce during the contest.

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by HokiePaul

6. Allowing the use of a shot clock as a state adoption option.

I hope my state never uses a shot clock in hs basketball. Problems with the shot clock not being set/reset and started properly by incompetent table crews would become the biggest pain in the ass.

[Robert E. Harrison]

How many actually call stepping out of bounds by offense or defense as a violation? If the defense does it you give the ball back to the offense and go and it is a turn over if the offense steps out.

Can we say gains an advantage by stepping out of bounds and go back to calling a charge if the defender seals of the endline by putting a foot on the line?

How many get tired of warning players and coaches for stepping OOB?

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by johnny d

I hope my state never uses a shot clock in hs basketball. Problems with the shot clock not being set/reset and started properly by incompetent table crews would become the biggest pain in the ass.

Must have a state full of idiots...we've had shot clock for quite some time and there aren't any more issues in a HS game than in a higher level game. Not even thinking back to the first few years...just wasn't that big of a problem.

And going back to getting rid of the seatbelt on an indirect T...I would be OK with that if they also changed the rule to only one T on assistant coaches being an ejection.

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I predict that the wearing of full-length tights will be made legal and incorporated into the leg-sleeve/arm-sleeve rule for restrictions on colors.

Additionally, I'd like to see the NFHS:
a. make the shot clock an acceptable state adoption.

b. The entirety of the team control/player control/backcourt violation rules need to be rewritten. They are still a mess from the TC foul change about three seasons ago.

c. Clarify that fighting during a live ball is a flagrant PERSONAL foul and that fighting during a dead ball is a flagrant TECHNICAL foul.

d. Reporting mechanic: permit two-handed reporting for fouls.

a) Absolutely not. You would be adding a significant cost to schools. Most schools would not be able to afford the cost of adding a shot clock.

b) Completely agree. This section needs to be rewritten.

c) Agreed.

d) Disagree, unless they change the rules to allow all numbers to be worn. Personally I think the rules need to stay the way they are on foul reporting.

I also don't want the restriction on free throws to end on the release. The way the rule is now is fine. Changing the rule will increase unneeded physical contact on free throws. The current rules penalize the offensive player if they miss the free throw because they give the defense the inside position for free throw missed rebounds, and the offense a limited time to overcome that. If you change to the release you lessen the penalty for missing a free throw because you increase the time the offense has to position themselves for a rebound. The simplest solution is that the offense should make the FREE throws in the first place.

[bballref3966]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

I also don't want the restriction on free throws to end on the release. The way the rule is now is fine. Changing the rule will increase unneeded physical contact on free throws. The current rules penalize the offensive player if they miss the free throw because they give the defense the inside position for free throw missed rebounds, and the offense a limited time to overcome that. If you change to the release you lessen the penalty for missing a free throw because you increase the time the offense has to position themselves for a rebound. The simplest solution is that the offense should make the FREE throws in the first place.

I'm not quite sure what you're saying. The players along the lane are all subject to the same restrictions, regardless of offense or defense. Unneeded physical contact? If it creates a disadvantage, call a foul. It's that simple. As for rebounding, the defense still has four players along the lane as opposed to the offense's two (three including the shooter). The defense has all the "advantage" it needs.

With the current, outdated rule, the likelihood of a lane violation being a big factor in the outcome of a game is too large. There's no reason not to change this rule.

[Coach Bill]

Originally Posted by bballref3966

I'm not quite sure what you're saying. The players along the lane are all subject to the same restrictions, regardless of offense or defense. Unneeded physical contact? If it creates a disadvantage, call a foul. It's that simple. As for rebounding, the defense still has four players along the lane as opposed to the offense's two (three including the shooter). The defense has all the "advantage" it needs.

With the current, outdated rule, the likelihood of a lane violation being a big factor in the outcome of a game is too large. There's no reason not to change this rule.

Absolutely, change that rule. The offensive free throw shooter has the biggest advantage the way the rule is right now. The guys standing next to him cannot get in the lane fast enough to box him out. I hate that. Plus, the release is a much easier thing to judge, than hitting the rim. Guys on the lane line get away with going in a foot before the ball hits the rim. It's too close for a ref to call, but not too close for an advantage to be gained.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

Absolutely, change that rule. The offensive free throw shooter has the biggest advantage the way the rule is right now. The guys standing next to him cannot get in the lane fast enough to box him out. I hate that. Plus, the release is a much easier thing to judge, than hitting the rim. Guys on the lane line get away with going in a foot before the ball hits the rim. It's too close for a ref to call, but not too close for an advantage to be gained.

You say the shooter has the biggest advantage? I think I see a shooter get the rebound maybe 3-4 times a year. Doesn't seem like a problem...the guys on the lane are 4 feet closer, they're fine.

It is a lot easier to judge the rim. You know exactly when it is going to happen. Guys are going in early only because no one calls it.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bballref3966

The players along the lane are all subject to the same restrictions, regardless of offense or defense.

Same restrictions? How about their location on the lane, defense inside, offense farther out. The "inside" position is always a big advantage in rebounding.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

You say the shooter has the biggest advantage?

Of course he does, but not in rebounding. He gets to take a fifteen foot shot, taking up to ten seconds to release it, with no defenders in his face trying to block his shot. Of course, that didn't help me in high school. I had an easier time making a put back with a defender than making an uncontested free throw.

[bballref3966]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Same restrictions? How about their location on the lane, defense inside, offense farther out. The "inside" position is always a big advantage in rebounding.

Ergo the defense has all the advantage it needs, so why are we concerned that changing the rule to the release would be "unfair" for the defense?

The other thing is the violation isn't called in half the high school games I watch. Might as well just make the change.

[Coach Bill]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

You say the shooter has the biggest advantage? I think I see a shooter get the rebound maybe 3-4 times a year. Doesn't seem like a problem...the guys on the lane are 4 feet closer, they're fine.

It is a lot easier to judge the rim. You know exactly when it is going to happen. Guys are going in early only because no one calls it.

The shooter has an advantage in rebounding, in that when you wait for the hit, it is impossible to get across the lane in time to box him out (if the shooter makes an effort). When you go on the release, and the shooter has to wait for the hit, it is easy to box him out.