Under NFHS:

*Arm and leg sleeves have to be the same color on the player and throughout the team (3-5-3b)
*Headbands and wrist bands have to be the same color on the player and throughout the team (3-5-4a)

Color My Wourld
 

Incorrect.

Arm + Leg = Same Legal Color A for all team players.
Head + Wrist = Same Legal Color B for all team players.
Legal Color A not necessarily = to Legal Color B.
Legal Colors: white, black, beige, or single solid school color.

(I think BMac has some PowerPoint with Manute and Spud that clarifies it in picture language) :)

I guess I disagree that it was not logical. I did not see this called very often by many officials and it was partly because we were splitting hairs to when the ball touched the rim or backboard.

I guess this is just as logical IMO as what was the reason they changed the rule to what it was for years.

Peace

Personally, I don't like automatics, preferring some degree of discretion and game management. There is a flow to the game and good officials understand that. I may do what I'm told, but I don't have to like it.

I don't understand this portion of the press release:
"
The rules committee also expanded the definition of an intentional foul in Rule 4-19-3d, which now states that an intentional foul is “excessive contact with an opponent while the ball is live or until an airborne shooter returns to the floor.”"

"Wynns said that this revision will address the issue of contact with the elbow and should reduce the subjectivity in making rulings on intentional fouls. "


Current rule -
ART. 3

An intentional foul is a personal or technical foul that may or may not be premeditated and is not based solely on the severity of the act. Intentional fouls include, but are not limited to:

a. Contact that neutralizes an opponent's obvious advantageous position.

b. Contact away from the ball with an opponent who is clearly not involved with a play.

c. Contact that is not a legitimate attempt to play the ball/player specifically designed to stop the clock or keep it from starting.

d. Excessive contact with an opponent while playing the ball.

e. Contact with a thrower-in as in 9-2-10 Penalty 4.


How does the change address elbows?

dsqrddgd909,

I agree. There must be some wording change that was not made clear. But I doubt that this is even an issue.

Peace

I'm honestly not sure these are misunderstood rules.

I agree completely.

Thanks for that clarification. A+B is what I was thinking of. I believe in CT, they have forced A and B to be the same color to prevent confusion. I am sure Billy will clarify and I would be interested in seeing his PowerPoint Presentation.

They aren't. These rules are usually something the participants are not aware of, but not misunderstood.

Peace

Probably so, as far is being just as logical as the change made several years ago. But, in the mean time, we also had the change to move players up one position along the lane, so things have change a bit.

As for splitting hairs, how has the change made it any different? The only thing that has changed is the specific point at which it is a violation. The hairsplitting issue will still exist, and possibly even to a greater degree since the new reference point is no longer as distinct and precise.

I don't understand this change either. It doesn't seem to change the current intentional foul rule at all. Fouls by or against an airborne shooter are clearly stated to be personal fouls already and excessive contact is already an intentional foul. So I don't get the point trying to be made here.

It changed IMO because it was not followed very well. I know it is sematics on some level, but when people did not move and others moved on the release, that made it very difficult for consistency. And considering the rule changed to have the first violation to be the only one considered on the lane line, I think you saw a lot of trying to figure out which took place first when a violation was clearly taking place on some level. But the rule was last applied with the defense being below the block and I believe a player right next to the FT shooter. That is 2 fewer people on the line as well.

Peace

Misunderstood ...
 

We use modified NCAA rules (release) in our prep school games. You'd be surprised how many times players behind the three point arc believe that they can move in to get in on some rebounding action on the release. Not aware? Misunderstood? Six of one. A half dozen of the other. Ignorantia juris non excusat or ignorantia legis neminem excusat.

Regarding Fashion Police rules. I wish I had a dollar for every time I explained the rules regarding equipment to players, and to coaches. I would be a multi-hundredaire.

The Constitution State Only ...
 

Connecticut: Headbands, wristbands, arm sleeves, and leg sleeves, all have to be one color (choice of white, black, beige, or a single solid school color) on each player, and for all members of the team. Again, this was for Connecticut only.

Here's last year's NFHS interpretation (for everyone except Connecticut) for the various color combinations:

http://www.iaabo6.org/Interp/2014/in...Oct%202013.pdf

Note: It's not Spud Webb, it's Muggsy Bogues. Freddy thinks that all short guys look alike.