2015-16 NFHS Proposed Basketball Rule Changes ...

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Adam

There are other situations, all far more likely, where we have multiple choices for violations.

If you think that you can clear these up with just a few minor changes in the rulebook, then go ahead and make some suggestions next year. Sometimes they do listen. You may have to be persistent, but sometimes they do listen.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

If you think that you can clear these up with just a few minor changes in the rulebook, then go ahead and make some suggestions next year. Sometimes they do listen. You may have to be persistent, but sometimes they do listen.

I don't see a need, that's the thing. Who cares? The penalty is the same, just pick one and go with it.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Adam

I don't see a need, that's the thing. Who cares? The penalty is the same, just pick one and go with it.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

It's more of a "test taking" change, than a practical change.

Maybe it's because I'm a retired middle school science teacher? Maybe it's because I'm now an analytical chemist? Maybe it because I served several years on my local board's training committee? Whenever possible (and sometimes it's not possible), I like simple, cut, and dry answers to questions; right, or wrong; yes, or no; correct, or incorrect; true, or false; basket interference, or goaltending. The less debate, the better I like it, keeping in mind that this sometimes can't be avoided, especially with more open ended, complex situations.

Imagine some type of written test, maybe for initial certification.

A1 tries for two point goal. B1 touches the ball while it is in its downward flight, entirely above the basket ring level, while the ball is in the cylinder, and while the ball has a possibility of entering the basket. Official rules a goaltending violation on B1 and awards A1 two points. Is the official correct?

Hopeful basketball official newbie notes "ball in the cylinder" and answers, "No", because he deems "ball in the cylinder" to be indicative of a basket interference violation.

Rather than get into a debate about if, and why, both "Yes", and "No", answers might be correct, as we often debate here on the Forum when the NFHS is unclear about a particular rule, definition, play, or situation, wouldn't it be nice to have one cut, and dry, answer here, with no debate necessary?

Imagine how much time we would save debating things here on the Forum if the NFHS were crystal clear on all their definitions, and rules?

I sincerely believe that a careless mistake was made in 2005-06, not an announced editorial rule change. It's simple to fix. Why not fix it?

If it weren't simple to fix (see team control/throwin/backcourt), I wouldn't try to fix it. I'm not that good at fixing complicated things. You should have seen me struggle to set all of my various clocks ahead one hour last weekend.

There are already enough players, coaches, and fans, that can't differentiate between basket interference, and goaltending. We really don't need any rules that feed into this myth.

The five part goaltending definition was good in 2004-05. Why wouldn't it be good in 2015-16?

[Hugh Refner]

Reducing the closely guarded distance from 6 feet to 3 feet will increase fouls, especially post play, by at least 25%.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Hugh Refner

Reducing the closely guarded distance from 6 feet to 3 feet will increase fouls, especially post play, by at least 25%.

Didn't the NCAA do this with womens basketball a few years ago? What was the result?

[crosscountry55]

Some of these suggested changes, like the wider lane, 6 PFs for DQ, advancing the ball on backcourt timeouts and the 10s backcourt count non-reset are pipe dreams until the NCAA adopts them first.

Adherence to the "rules changes trickle-down effect" is a tried and true method of the NFHS committee.

Yeah, except for maybe some definitions changes (SD, post-player, etc.) I see hardly any of these getting adopted. Except that maybe giving states the choice on shot clock use would be approved, because eight states already have them, and if you can't beat 'em, join 'em.

[paulsonj72]

How about the halves instead of quarters. We here in Minnesota have been playing 18:00 halves since the 05-06 season and it is going quite well thank you very much. Lower level games are 14 or 16 minute halves