New NFHS Free Throw Rule.

[JRutledge]

I had no problems with the rules. I work college so it was like riding an old bike. It worked out well and in a couple of cases things were rough, but you call the fouls and that went away.

I love the rule and it is no different than officiating rebounding action in any other part of the game.

Peace

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I love the rule and it is no different than officiating rebounding action in any other part of the game.

Why do you love the rule?

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Why do you love the rule?

Because he has a sick fetish!

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Why do you love the rule?

Because it was the worst rules change I can think of in my career in the first place. Hardly anyone called the violation and it required officials to split hairs in order to call a violation in many cases. I hated the old rule.

Is that good enough for you?

Peace

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Is that good enough for you?

I can't tell if this is a sincere question or sarcastic. My question was sincere, I genuinely wanted to know what you thought.

[Rich]

I am also glad for the change. Then again, I didn't have any problems officiating "rough" rebounding action, either.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by AremRed

I can't tell if this is a sincere question or sarcastic. My question was sincere, I genuinely wanted to know what you thought.

It was both actually.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Because it was the worst rules change I can think of in my career in the first place. Hardly anyone called the violation and it required officials to split hairs in order to call a violation in many cases. I hated the old rule.

Is that good enough for you?

Peace

I'm happy for the change, but I don't see any less hair splitting now than before.

[just another ref]

This violation has been ignored a lot for the past several years, becoming one of those "I hate to be the only one who calls this." If necessary, which hopefully it won't be, I can see myself being a pioneer now. Players in the lane while the ball is in the hands of the shooter is not something I think I can tolerate.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Players in the lane while the ball is in the hands of the shooter is not something I think I can tolerate.

Previous to the rule change, players in the lane while the ball was in flight was not something that I tolerated.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by just another ref

This violation has been ignored a lot for the past several years, becoming one of those "I hate to be the only one who calls this." If necessary, which hopefully it won't be, I can see myself being a pioneer now. Players in the lane while the ball is in the hands of the shooter is not something I think I can tolerate.

I agree this was probably the reason why the rule was changed. But I don't think officials will continue to let players violate under the new rule. Now it will be beyond obvious when a player along the lane line enters early.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I agree this was probably the reason why the rule was changed. But I don't think officials will continue to let players violate under the new rule. Now it will be beyond obvious when a player along the lane line enters early.

I don't anticipate anyone making the call unless it's just as obvious as before. Again, the hair splitting just moves to a different point in time, but it's still going to be there.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Now it will be beyond obvious when a player along the lane line enters early.

What would make it more obvious on the release than on the hit?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Adam

I'm happy for the change, but I don't see any less hair splitting now than before.

Exactly. That hair has just been repositioned. The same decision must still be made for those willing to make it.