NFHS Questionnaire

[BillyMac]

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.

[BillyMac]

Color restrictions on socks? Give me a break.

[APG]

F'n socks....socks

[SC Official]

"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?

[Mregor]

Originally Posted by SC Official

"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?

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.

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by Mregor

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.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by SC Official

"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?

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)

[JRutledge]

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

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

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 player control
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)

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?

[bob jenkins]

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?

[Welpe]

Here's the direct link:

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

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Color restrictions on socks? Give me a break.

[jTheUmp]

My thoughts.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

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

1. Illegal uniforms. No

2. Flopping. No more than usual

3. Number and uniform same color. No

4. An increase in rough play during rebounds. Yes, especially on free throws.

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. No

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. No. All this would do is add another layer of confusion for players, coaches, and officials.

2. Eliminating scoring on any charge call. Meh... I've never seen a BI/GT violation prior to a charge... why are we worried about a call that occurs so rarely?

3. Adding specific information to the rules book for cleaning up post play. Yes... if they do it for hand-checks, do it for post play also.

4. Calling a time-out and moving the ball to the half-court line. No.

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. Meh. (Of course, I had a coach on Tuesday try to tell me that we couldn't call a 5-second violation "if he makes a move towards the basket")

8. Adding the defensive arc to the floor. No... solution in search of a problem

9. Providing a definition for a secondary defender. No

10. Playing the game in halves. Yes. MN has done this for my entire basketball officiating career... I like it.

11. Playing with a shot clock. No

12. Adding a sock color restriction/regulation to the uniform rule code.No. No. NO. A thousand times, NO. If anything, they should remove a lot of the currently-existing fashion police rules.

[BryanV21]

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.

[constable]

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.....