2015-16 NFHS Proposed Basketball Rule Changes ...
 

The items (below) are on the Agenda of the NFHS Basketball Rules Committee, that will meet at the Hyatt Regency, Indianapolis, Indiana, on April 20-22, 2015:

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

Adding the defensive arc to the floor

Officials should refrain from wearing jewelry, fitness bands, or other items that are not necessary for performing their duties. Could add a statement that “a wedding ring is not considered jewelry.” (similar to language re medical alert bracelets).

Permitting a player to have 6 personal fouls before disqualification

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

The sleeves/tight shall be black or white.

Headbands and wristbands shall be white or black.

Delete: A visible manufacturer’s logo/trademark/reference is not permitted on the undershirt.

Add to Basket Interference definition: Causes the basket or backboard to vibrate when the ball is on or within the basket or the backboard and/or is on or in the cylinder … Inadvertently or unintentionally slaps the backboard in a legitimate attempt to block a shot. Note: slap by a player that is deemed to be intentional would still be a Technical Foul as in Rule 10-3-4.

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

Add to Goaltending definition the requirement of the ball having to be outside of the imaginary cylinder

A post player is any offensive or defensive player in the lane area with or without the ball with his/her back to the basket.

Providing a definition for a secondary defender

Eliminate scoring on any charge call.

Playing the game in halves

When a time-out is called while the ball is in the backcourt; move the ball to the half court line to restart the game.

The free throw(s) awarded because of a personal foul shall be attempted by the offended player. If such player must withdraw because of an injury or disqualification, the opposing coach shall select one of the four remaining players in the game at the time of the injury to attempt the injured player’s free throw(s). However, the injured player’s coach shall select any team member to substitute for the injured player. In addition, if the committed foul is an intentional foul or flagrant foul, the offended coach may select any team member/player to attempt the free throw(s). He/she may also select his/her substitute to enter the game. Consequently, if the injury involves blood, the offended coach shall select any substitute from his/her bench to enter the game to attempt the free throw(s).

Not receiving a new 10 sec. after a time-out called from the backcourt or a deflection

By state association adoption, allow the use of shot clock. Shot clock allotted time duration to be determined by state association. The team in control shall attempt a try for goal within allotted time after gaining team control. The try shall leave the shooter’s hand before the expiration of the allotted shot-clock period, and subsequently strike the basket ring or enter the basket before or after the allotted shot-clock period.

Play with a shot clock

Both would now be violations: A player shall not leave the court for an unauthorized reason; nor shall a player purposely and/or deceitfully delay returning after legally being out of bounds.

Technical foul: The head coach shall not permit a team member to participate while wearing an illegal uniform (see 3-4). or illegal apparel.

Technical foul: If there are multiple offenders due to celebration of a successful try, the penalty is one team technical foul and one indirect technical foul to the head coach.

Adding specific information to the rules book for cleaning up post play.
a) It is legal for offensive and defensive players to touch when both are maintaining a legally established position.
b) Illegal contact on post player. It is a foul when:
- an arm-bar is extended and displaces an opponent.
- displacement occurs from a locked and/or extended elbow.
- a leg or knee is used in the rear of an opponent to hold or displace.
- an offensive post player “backs-down” and displaces the defender once that defender has established a legal guarding position.
- the offensive post player holds, hooks or displaces the leg or body of the defender.
- an opponent is displaced from a legally established or obtained position.

Remove current signal #28 which is the same as #7. Replace with a new signal to be used after a made basket and there is a stoppage in play. The signal is used by the officials to indicate the team inbounding the ball may run the baseline. The signal will be: Arm extended from chest, elbow bent at 90 degree angle, move hand and forearm from the elbow in a waving motion horizontally along the endline.

I can't wait to see what they select as new rules for 2015-16. The announcement will be as exciting as Christmas morning. I'm sure that, due to the excitement, I won't be able to sleep for the next month.

They Finally Took My Suggestions Seriously ...
 

https://sp.yimg.com/ib/th?id=HN.6080...2&pid=15.1&P=0

"If at first you don't succeed, try, try, try again" (W. E. Hickson, British educational writer)

BillyMac's Suggested NFHS Rule Changes:

1) Background:

NFHS 9-3-3: A player shall not leave the court for an unauthorized reason.
PENALTY: (Section 3) The ball is dead when the violation occurs and is awarded to the opponents for a throw in from the designated out-of-bounds spot nearest the violation. (See 6-7-9 Exception d)

NFHS 10-3-2: A player shall not: Purposely and/or deceitfully delay returning after legally being out of bounds.
PENALTY: (Section 3) Two free throws plus ball for division-line throw-in.

Change 10-3-2 from a technical foul to a violation. Purposely and/or deceitfully delay returning after legally being out of bounds should carry the same penalty as leaving the court for an unauthorized reason.

NFHS 9-3-3-B: A player shall not purposely and/or deceitfully delay returning after legally being out of bounds.
PENALTY: (Section 3) The ball is dead when the violation occurs and is awarded to the opponents for a throw-in from the designated out-of-bounds spot nearest the violation. (See 6-7-9 Exception d)

2) Background:

If you have a situation where a player touches the ball during a field-goal try, while it is in its downward flight, entirely above the basket ring level, while the ball is in the cylinder, and the ball has the possibility of entering the basket in flight, then, by strict interpretation of the written definition, the official can call either a goaltending violation, or a basket interference violation.

The definition of goaltending did contain the requirement of the ball having to be outside of the imaginary cylinder through the 2003-04 season. For some unknown reason the rule was edited, without comment, or announcement, for the 2004-05 season and that part of the definition was dropped.

2002-03 NFHS 4-22: Goaltending occurs when a player touches the ball during a field-goal try or tap while: a) the ball is in downward flight. b) the entire ball is above the level of the basket ring. c) the ball has the possibility of entering the basket in flight. d) the ball is not touching an imaginary cylinder which has the basket ring as its lower base.

2012-13 NFHS 4-22: Goaltending occurs when a player touches the ball during a field-goal try or tap while it is in its downward flight entirely above the basket ring level and has the possibility of entering the basket in flight.

This omission (outside the cylinder) needs to be corrected.

Widening the lane to 16 feet/opening up the post play.
Don't care

Adding the defensive arc to the floor

Hate it

Officials should refrain from wearing jewelry, fitness bands, or other items that are not necessary for performing their duties.

Stupid, but the inevitable result of officials wearing fitness bands. Probably won't apply to wedding bands in most areas, but still.

Permitting a player to have 6 personal fouls before disqualification

Hate it.

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

Hate it.

The sleeves/tight shall be black or white.

Headbands and wristbands shall be white or black.

Not sure whether I care.

Delete: A visible manufacturer’s logo/trademark/reference is not permitted on the undershirt.
I'm sure I don't care.

Add to Basket Interference definition: Causes the basket or backboard to vibrate when the ball is on or within the basket or the backboard and/or is on or in the cylinder … Inadvertently or unintentionally slaps the backboard in a legitimate attempt to block a shot. Note: slap by a player that is deemed to be intentional would still be a Technical Foul as in Rule 10-3-4.

No need.

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

Hate it. Given how much they want to clean up the rough play, this would be a bad idea.

Add to Goaltending definition the requirement of the ball having to be outside of the imaginary cylinder

Why?

A post player is any offensive or defensive player in the lane area with or without the ball with his/her back to the basket.

Providing a definition for a secondary defender

Hate it (see my comment on the arc)

Eliminate scoring on any charge call.

I don't think anyone knows what this means in this context. How are they defining "charge" so that this isn't already the case?

Playing the game in halves

No

When a time-out is called while the ball is in the backcourt; move the ball to the half court line to restart the game.

Hell no.

The free throw(s) awarded because of a personal foul shall be attempted by the offended player. If such player must withdraw because of an injury or disqualification, the opposing coach shall select one of the four remaining players in the game at the time of the injury to attempt the injured player’s free throw(s). However, the injured player’s coach shall select any team member to substitute for the injured player. In addition, if the committed foul is an intentional foul or flagrant foul, the offended coach may select any team member/player to attempt the free throw(s). He/she may also select his/her substitute to enter the game. Consequently, if the injury involves blood, the offended coach shall select any substitute from his/her bench to enter the game to attempt the free throw(s).

Hell no.

Not receiving a new 10 sec. after a time-out called from the backcourt or a deflection

Hell no.

By state association adoption, allow the use of shot clock. Shot clock allotted time duration to be determined by state association. The team in control shall attempt a try for goal within allotted time after gaining team control. The try shall leave the shooter’s hand before the expiration of the allotted shot-clock period, and subsequently strike the basket ring or enter the basket before or after the allotted shot-clock period. Play with a shot clock

Don't really care. Solution in search of a problem.

Both would now be violations: A player shall not leave the court for an unauthorized reason; nor shall a player purposely and/or deceitfully delay returning after legally being out of bounds.

This one I like.

Technical foul: The head coach shall not permit a team member to participate while wearing an illegal uniform (see 3-4). or illegal apparel.

Not needed, and if they think increasing the severity of the punishment will increase enforcement, they're crazy.

Technical foul: If there are multiple offenders due to celebration of a successful try, the penalty is one team technical foul and one indirect technical foul to the head coach.

Not sure.

Adding specific information to the rules book for cleaning up post play.
a) It is legal for offensive and defensive players to touch when both are maintaining a legally established position.
b) Illegal contact on post player. It is a foul when:
- an arm-bar is extended and displaces an opponent.
- displacement occurs from a locked and/or extended elbow.
- a leg or knee is used in the rear of an opponent to hold or displace.
- an offensive post player “backs-down” and displaces the defender once that defender has established a legal guarding position.
- the offensive post player holds, hooks or displaces the leg or body of the defender.
- an opponent is displaced from a legally established or obtained position.

Not sure, I don't like all of it. I don't see a need for this, though.

Aside from the definition and rules cleaning up post play, I'm not seeing any worthwhile changes here.

Addendum ...
 

I did a lot of copying, and pasting, and consequently, forgot to include this (below), that was part of the suggested change. Sorry.

Could add a statement that “a wedding ring is not considered jewelry.” (similar to language re medical alert bracelets).

Fish, Or Cut Bait ...
 

Because, right now, you have a situation where a player touches the ball during a field-goal try, while it is in its downward flight, entirely above the basket ring level, while the ball is in the cylinder, and the ball has the possibility of entering the basket in flight, and, by strict interpretation of the written definition, the official can call either a goaltending violation, or a basket interference violation.

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

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

For Purposes Of The Written Test ...
 

I sincerely believe that this was an editing mistake by the committee, not an announced change, several years ago. The goaltending definition was fine as it was before the mistake, it should go back to the way it was, and, as I said, in a previous post, it's more of a "test taking" change, than a practical change.

If it really wasn't a mistake, and they had a good reason to drop that part of the definition, then they won't have a good reason to put that part of the definition back into the rulebook.

Previous to the 2004-05 season it was clear to all that there were five specific conditions under which goaltending could occur. Let's go back to those misty water colored memories. Simpler times, and simpler pleasures.

I believe that this goaltending mistake was a simple "brain fart", just like the dropping of the "captains request a line up after multiple substitutions" rule, that was, I believe, inadvertently dropped from the rulebook several years ago. I was one of several officials who brought that to the attention of the NFHS, and it was put back in the rulebook.

Sometimes (a kind word, maybe not deserved) the NFHS drops the ball, and, then, somebody has to pick it up.

Multiple Choices ...
 

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.

Cut, And Dry, No Debate Necessary ...
 

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?

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

I Know More About Open Heart Surgery Than College Basketball Rules ...
 

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

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.

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

Halves ???
 

There was no time period recommended, or even mentioned, in the proposed rule change. It made the list because of the number of positive responses on the NFHS Questionnaire:

10. Would You Favor: Playing the game in halves?

I'm not opposed to it as long as they don't increase the number of allotted timeouts. Six to one, half dozen to another.

I'm sure they'd start with 16-min halves. States that wanted to try (or continue with) 18 would probably do so at the expense of conceding their periodic opportunity for a regional seat on the rules committee (the same way the shot clock states concede such a seat).

I'm sure it's going well. Quarters are working well for us. I don't see this as a big deal either way.

The Constitution State ...
 

Here in Connecticut, our private prep school games are played with 16 minute halves, four 60 second timeouts, and two 30 second timeouts.

I really prefer eight minute periods, the "guaranteed" break after eight minutes to catch my breath, both physically, and mentally, and to possibly confer with my partner about how the game is progressing, and whether, or not, we should make any adjustments.

If the NFHS goes to halves, I can live with it. I agree with Adam, "I don't see this as a big deal either way".

I don't understand why some people feel so strongly about the halves/quarters argument. I guess it would make the game quicker, so officials don't have to stick around so long. But would it make that big a difference? I mean, it's like the new pace of play rules in MLB, which are shaving maybe 10 to 15 minutes off of a three hour game. Frankly, is it worth the headache? I don't think so.

But if halves were adopted country-wide, then there should be a couple more time outs added for teams. You shouldn't just take away two one minute breaks (the ones between quarters). Even if you give teams a couple extra 30-second TOs instead of full ones.

Heck, I know in some fast-paced games I appreciate the breaks.

The numbers of items I read and think, "Not in a million years" is almost all of them.

A Million Years Is A Long Time ...
 

I bet that this is the one that you would believe would happen in a million years:

Delete: A visible manufacturer’s logo/trademark/reference is not permitted on the undershirt.

This really can't be generating any controversy? Right? Any relaxation of any of the Fashion Police rules is good? Right?

Wait? I'm being told ... What unintended consequences? Size? Measure it with a ruler? That I have to keep in my pocket? Square inches? Will this involve math? Never mind.

No, they'll pass than and then put a sock rule in place.

How about not making game officials deal with such nonsense in the first place?

Down The Middle Lies The Virtue ...
 

I can't agree with you until you define "nonsense".

There's a spectrum of Fashion Police issues. On one end of the spectrum are rules that dictate that players on the same team wear the same color uniforms, in a color that's different than the opponent's color, with legible, and different, numbers. At the same end of the spectrum are safety issues, i.e., jewelry. Then we take a long journey down to the other end of the spectrum where we have rules involving logos, knee pads, sleeves, headbands, hair control devices, etc.

Where on that Fashion Police spectrum does common sense end, and "nonsense" begin? I'm not in favor of doing away with all Fashion Police issues, but I really wish that the NFHS would relax some of those issues, using common sense as a guide. Socks would be as far down the "nonsense" end of the spectrum as one could get.

The "fashion police" rules only bother me when it comes to making us responsible for making sure manufacturer logos are the correct size, or there aren't too many of them. That's something that leagues or states should take care of. Or talking about the size of numbers or letters, as if we need to start carrying rulers with us to games.

The sock thing goes too far, but when it comes to undershirts, sleeves, head/wristbands, I don't have a problem. Just say they need to be white, black, or a single solid school color, and all team members have to wear the same color. Teams look good, and there's no confusion between one team and the other.

The Volunteer State ...
 

Here's the rationale for the black, and white, restrictions (sleeves, tights, headbands, wristbands), and for the head coach technical foul for illegal apparel:

It makes the rule easier to understand by officials, coaches & players. We are spending more time discussing what is legal & illegal with uniforms & apparel than we are spending with hand-checking, post-play, etc. It will also put more responsibility on coaches to make sure their players are dressed legally.

It was submitted by someone in Tennessee.

I secretly like the menagerie of shoe and sock colors. If anything, it helps me to ID individual players quickly. If I notice during pre-game that A1, wearing periwinkle shoes and hot pink socks, has a "happy feet" tendency on his dribble drive, it heightens my awareness when I see those same shoes and socks at the top of the key during the game.

Oak Would Also Be Good Color ...
 

If I were a high school head coach, I would never allow any of my players, especially the guards, to wear these new-fangled, bright, fluorescent colored shoes, and socks. Anything that draws extra attention to a player's feet, or makes it easier to see a player's feet, can only lead to a few extra travel calls over the course of a season.

Best color for player's shoes, and socks? Pine.

For those who wonder here in Minnesota with halves the number of timeouts has NOT increased. Still have the same number we did with quarters.

Let me know when the final verdict comes down, I'll do whatever.

+1

I hope fixing the team control fiasco is covered in the editorial changes. That should be job one.

The triumph of hope over experience.

When do the NCAA rules committees meet? Has anything been published about what they officially have on the table this year?

Yup. Can't be bothered since I don't have a seat at the table anyway.

I had a kid a few years ago ask me if I liked his fancy new silver shoes. I said "yes--it is now easier to see you travel"

Even he got a good laugh out of that one.