NFHS Questionnaire
 

NFHS Questionnaire

Part I – Are These Changes Made Last Year Satisfactory?

1. Arm sleeves, knee sleeves, lower leg sleeves and tights are permissible:
a. Anything worn on the arm and/or leg is a sleeve, except a knee brace, and shall meet the color restrictions.
b. The sleeves/tights shall be black, white, beige or the predominant color of the uniform and the same color sleeves/tights shall be worn by teammates.
c. All sleeves/tights shall be the same solid color.
d. Meet the logo requirements in 3-6.
Note: In general, a brace is defined as anything that contains hinges and/or straps or an opening over the knee cap.

2. Intentional fouls include, but are not limited to, excessive contact with an opponent while the ball is live or until an airborne shooter returns to the floor.

3. A player occupying a marked lane space may not have either foot beyond the vertical plane of the outside edge of any lane boundary, or beyond the vertical plane of any edge of the space (2 inches by 36 inches) designated by a lane-space mark or beyond the vertical plane of any edge of the space (12 inches by 36 inches) designated by a neutral zone. A player shall position one foot near the outer edge of the free-throw lane line. The other foot may be positioned anywhere within the designated 36-inch lane space until the ball has been released.

4. The following acts constitute a foul when committed against a ball handler/dribbler:
a. Placing two hands on the player.
b. Placing an extended arm bar on the player.
c. Placing and keeping a hand on the player.
d. Contacting the player more than once with the same hand or alternating hands.

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

1. Illegal uniforms.

2. Flopping.

3. Number and uniform same color.

4. An increase in rough play during rebounds.

5. An increase in slapping the backboard.

6. An increase in recording/reporting errors to the scorekeeping personnel.

7. Correctable errors being administered incorrectly in games.

8. Uniform code and adornment rule codes being properly enforced in games.

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

1. Not getting a new 10 seconds after a time-out called from the backcourt or a deflection.

2. Eliminating scoring on any charge call.

3. Adding specific information to the rules book for cleaning up post play.

4. Calling a time-out and moving the ball to the half-court line.

5. Permitting a player to have six personal fouls.

6. Widening the lane to 16 feet/opening up post play.

7. Changing the closely guarded to 3 feet instead of 6 feet.

8. Adding the defensive arc to the floor.

9. Providing a definition for a secondary defender.

10. Playing the game in halves.

11. Playing with a shot clock.

12. Adding a sock color restriction/regulation to the uniform rule code.

Really ???
 

Color restrictions on socks? Give me a break.

F'n socks....socks

Could be worse
 

http://www.shoemall.com/assets/categ...k_it_to_me.jpg

"Eliminating scoring on any charge call."

Does this mean to say that no points shall be awarded on a defensive BI/GT violation that occurs prior to a player control foul?

I.1 -- No, it's not satisfactory. But, they don't ask anything about how to fix it.

III.2 -- what does this mean? There already isn't any scoring on a charge play (at least as most will read the question)

And -- where did you find the questionnaire?

Here's the direct link:

http://www.nfhs.org/sports-resource-...uestionnaires/

My thoughts.

1. Not getting a new 10 seconds after a time-out called from the backcourt or a deflection.
-Seems to me that calling a time out is a way to avoid getting the violation. And it's not like a team gets unlimited time outs, anyway. And I've never seen it as any sort of problem. Change for the sake of change... not good.

2. Eliminating scoring on any charge call.
-Umm...

3. Adding specific information to the rules book for cleaning up post play.
-So the defense can't put a hand on a player, but they are allowed to "bang" in the post? That doesn't make sense.

4. Calling a time-out and moving the ball to the half-court line.
-No. You're taking away strategy for no reason. Getting the ball to where you want the inbound after a time out is part of the game.

5. Permitting a player to have six personal fouls.
-Again... change for the sake of change. There's no problem to address with this.

6. Widening the lane to 16 feet/opening up post play.
-No. Why do this?

7. Changing the closely guarded to 3 feet instead of 6 feet.
-No. One, I've never seen it as an issue. And two, why?

8. Adding the defensive arc to the floor.
-Yet another solution without a problem. I understand why others have it, but I don't see it as nearly a big enough problem to go through all the things necessary to implement it (money to change floors, training of officials and coaches, etc)

9. Providing a definition for a secondary defender.
-Should the book also define what a "ball" is?

10. Playing the game in halves.
-I really don't know. Would this, or should this, affect the number of time outs a team gets? I mean, the time between the quarters (minus halftime) kind of acts as 6th and 7th TOs right now.

11. Playing with a shot clock.
-There has only been one time in my career where a shot clock would have got the game going. We had a player dribble the ball by the division line for over a minute straight, while everybody else just stood around waiting. The fans eventually started yelling to "do something". But was it a problem? No.

12. Adding a sock color restriction/regulation to the uniform rule code.
-LOL. I've looked at different color socks all year on team members and thought, "I wouldn't be surprised if by next year they expanded color rules to socks." Please don't tell me it's true.

Sock colour restrictions? Seriously?

With regards to having the 10 second count continue after an OOB, kick, or held ball where the offense retains possession it really isn't that big of a deal.

We use both NFHS and FIBA rules here. FIBA has this rule. It is drilled into their heads now to inquire what the time remaining is now during a throw in that we even see it during NFHS games.

Is it really that difficult to say 5 seconds to advance the ball?

If people find that confusing.....

I've seen it suggested (somewhere else on this forum) that the move to halves could be accompanied with a rule that an automatic, non-charged-to-a-team timeout be taken following the first foul or violation after the midpoint of the half (so, if you're playing 16-minute halves, the first foul/violation after at/below 7:59 on the clock).

MN doesn't do this, and I don't think there's any need to do this, but it would remove concerns about the "6th or 7th timeout" while having less of an interruption on the flow of the game.

Interesting. I like that it would only add two more minutes to the game, instead of four... like teams both getting two extra TOs would lead to (assuming they were full TOs).

At first, I liked adding two more time outs, but they would likely be saved until the end of the game. Hell, the time outs thing may not be an issue, anyway. Just curious.

Peace

For the record, I liked all the changes to the actual playing of the game. I hate this issue with sleeves and arm bands. I wish the NF would just allow players to wear whatever they wish as long as it is a solid color. Who cares if they match or not. Maybe the only thing is to allow certain colors, but do we have to match every item? We do not see most of these things anyway until the warm-ups come off.

Peace

My thoughts.

I'd really like to know what they mean about scoring on a charge call. Did somebody think the NCAA-M rule apply?

Colour My World (Chicago, 1970) ...
 

I officiated a preseason scrimmage in which the players wore scrimmage jerseys, white for home, and red for visitors, with many players wearing multiple color undershirts underneath their jerseys. Because it was a scrimmage, we didn't enforce the undershirt color rule. Rebounding fouls, and out of bounds calls under the basket, that would usually be very easy, became a slight challenge. When you've got few big kids reaching for a rebound, some with a white jersey and a red undershirt, some with a red jersey and a white undershirt, some with a white jersey and a white undershirt, and some with a red jersey and a red undershirt, simple calls became more difficult, not a lot more difficult, but still, more difficult.

I believe that the NFHS is right to have color rules for equipment, and uniforms, but only from the waist up. I really don't care what the players are wearing from the waist down, with the only possible exceptions being a kicked ball out of a crowd, or an out of bounds call from a crowd off a player's leg, but we don't get too many of those.

Huh?

I take it as a pass and crash. The dribbler passing to another player but continuing through defender. The foul is charging and I agree, they should not score on the play.

That makes no sense. You couldn't possibly score on this type of play anyway. A team control foul on a pass and crash would result in the ball becoming dead immediately.

My thought...This would bring the rule closer to the NBA offensive foul call rules. Offense can't score on any offensive foul if I recall correctly

Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
Part II – Observations – Have You Seen In Your Area?

1. Illegal uniforms. No

2. Flopping. No

3. Number and uniform same color. No

4. An increase in rough play during rebounds. No

5. An increase in slapping the backboard. No

6. An increase in recording/reporting errors to the scorekeeping personnel. No

7. Correctable errors being administered incorrectly in games. No

8. Uniform code and adornment rule codes being properly enforced in games. Mostly-some guys just hate being fashion police

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

1. Not getting a new 10 seconds after a time-out called from the backcourt or a deflection. Yes-would love this actually.

2. Eliminating scoring on any charge call. No

3. Adding specific information to the rules book for cleaning up post play. No way

4. Calling a time-out and moving the ball to the half-court line. I don't like this rule in the NBA

5. Permitting a player to have six personal fouls. No

6. Widening the lane to 16 feet/opening up post play. No

7. Changing the closely guarded to 3 feet instead of 6 feet. No - think this would slow down the game

8. Adding the defensive arc to the floor. Agree with APG - Yes, fans already think it's there

9. Providing a definition for a secondary defender. No

10. Playing the game in halves. No-these are teens-I don't mind them getting the extra break

11. Playing with a shot clock. Would love it

12. Adding a sock color restriction/regulation to the uniform rule code. OMG-No

This ???
 

4.19.6 SITUATION A: B1 obtains a legal position in A1’s path before A1
becomes airborne. A1 jumps and releases the ball on a try for goal. Before returning
to the floor, airborne shooter A1 charges into B1. (a) Before the foul by A1,
B2 commits basket interference; or (b) after the foul on A1, B2 slaps the ball on
its downward flight. RULING: In (a), both the violation and the foul are penalized.
The basket interference by B2 causes the ball to become dead immediately. The
violation is penalized by awarding the two points. The player-control foul on A1 is
also charged. Team B is awarded the ball for a throw-in anywhere along the end
line. A defensive-goaltending or basket-interference violation committed prior to a
player-control foul does not contradict the general statement that when a playercontrol
foul occurs that player cannot score. In the case of a defensive violation, it
is the violation which results in awarding the score. In (b), the ball becomes dead
and the try ends immediately when the player-control foul on A1 occurs. The
action of B2 is ignored as goaltending cannot occur after the try has ended. The
ball is awarded to Team B for a throw-in from a designated spot out of bounds
closest to where the foul occurred. (4-12-1; 6-7-4; 6-7-9 Exception; 7-5-4a; 9-11)

Yes, that is a case play that would not apply if this rule applies. Not sure why they would change this rule for such a rare situation?

Peace

Inquiring Minds Want To Know ???
 

If the defensive basket interference, before the foul, "causes the ball to became dead immediately", then how can one charge the player control foul? I thought that fouls during a dead ball must be intentional, or flagrant, to be charged (as technical fouls)?

What am I missing here, besides common sense?

Found It ...
 

4-19: A foul is an infraction of the rules which is charged and is penalized.
ART. 1 A personal foul is a player foul which involves illegal contact with
an opponent while the ball is live, which hinders an opponent from performing
normal defensive and offensive movements. A personal foul also includes contact
by or on an airborne shooter when the ball is dead.

(Hey. I've got to get my post numbers up. What's the next rank above Esteemed Forum Member? Most Exalted Forum Member?)

You sure can. The pass goes to A2 who slams home. No more T/C. A1 crashes into B1. That's all I can see about what they mean unless it is a charge by the shooter who is no longer airborne and charges through an opponent. Same scenario basically in that basket is already made before the foul.

The ball would be dead, so there wouldn't even be a foul (unless intentional or flagrant).

The scenarios I can think of where there would be a charge with the basket counting are: 1) A1 takes a shot, which is still in the air when he, who is not an airborne shooter, charges into an opponent. 2) A1 passes to A2, who throws up an immediate shot and then A1 charges into a defender.

Both of these are fairly rare and I don't think necessitate a rule change.

Agreed. Someone considered a scenario they felt was unfair and wants a rule change for the sasquatch.

NFHS questionnaire
 

I was also emailed the NFHS questionnaire. It came to me via MSHAA.

5. Permitting a player to have six personal fouls. I answered "yes"

Basketball is the only sport that has a limit. A football player can have 17 holding penalties in a game without disqualification. A hockey player can have 12 tripping penalties without disqualification. What makes basketball different? If we are worried about a foul fest, 1 more is not going to break the bank. In light of the hand check emphasis, we are seeing starter A1 going to the bench with 2 fouls and sitting until the start of the second half because he picked up "2 quick ones".

And then throw in the 2 Twenty minute halves possibility, there is 4 more mintes of game time. (Yes, I believe the NCAA should be 6 also)

Just curious of reasoning behind all of the "no" responses in the sticky note that Billy posted....

I've actually seen players using hands less in response to the hand check changes. I think adding a foul pretty much counter-acts any benefits of the rule change with regard to cleaner play.

If they add 4 minutes of game time, then I can see adding a foul.

I suspect it is because if players are permitted an additional foul there will be more physical play. In my mind 5 is plenty for HS and College. (IIRC correctly one of the conferences experimente with 6 PFs [Big East?] in the late 80s; after a couple of years they wnet back to 5.)

(BTW, soccer has something slightly similar, albeit rarely invoked. A soccer player can be cautioned and then dismissed for "persistent infringement" of the laws of the game -- whcih generally refers to fouls. But there is not a magic number of fouls.)

6 fouls means I have to call more on your idiot troublemaker player before he sits down to cool off. And that means the other team is shooting bonus earlier. Do you really want that?

Yes there is, it's 4. :D

I understand about college. But their teams are generally 12-15 players deep. You can throw goons out there just to use up the foul count and protect your starters at the end of a close game.

In a C size school, (Michigan has A B C and D classes) like us, 20 district kids from being a class D, we have 4 on the bench. Meaning an injury and foul trouble means I have to suit up. :D

[QUOTE=AremRed;956659]6 fouls means I have to call more on your idiot troublemaker player before he sits down to cool off. And that means the other team is shooting bonus earlier. Do you really want that?



If he is an idiot -trouble maker, a T and a PF at once gets him out all the quicker!

I don't think reaching and over the back are quite the troublemaker fouls.:D

Didn't you get disqualified? I thought you flunked algebra. :eek:

1981- I fouled out in the second quarter. So did the man I was guarding.

I don't like extra chances for players to foul. I'm good with 5, and always will be.

You're right, reaching and over the back aren't fouls at all.

Coach P...I merged your thread with the existing thread.

If you've got kids fouling out on these calls, your issue is with the officiating, not the rules. :)

Ahh. So that's why you think fouls should go up to 6.:cool:

Thats why the big green :D

NFHS games are 32 minutes long... (36 minutes in MN... 18-minute halves).
5 fouls / 32 minutes = 1 foul per 6.4 minutes.


NBA games are 48 minutes long.
6 fouls / 48 minutes = 1 foul every 8 minutes.


Adding a 6th foul to NFHS games would allow one foul every 5.3 minutes.