The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   '15-'16 NFHS Changes (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/99719-15-16-nfhs-changes.html)

SCalScoreKeeper Tue Apr 28, 2015 01:16pm

'15-'16 NFHS Changes
 
Anyone know when the 2015-2016 NFHS changes will be announced?

Freddy Tue Apr 28, 2015 03:37pm

Extra, Extra, Read All About It . . . When?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by SCalScoreKeeper (Post 961414)
Anyone know when the 2015-2016 NFHS changes will be announced?

Last year's new stuff came out as a press release on the NFHS website on May 5.
http://www.nfhs.org/activities-sports/basketball/

crosscountry55 Tue Apr 28, 2015 06:08pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by SCalScoreKeeper (Post 961414)
Anyone know when the 2015-2016 NFHS changes will be announced?

I was just wondering the same thing today.

I'm pretty sure the committee has already met and adjourned. I think it's just a matter of the editors gathering the results and generating a press release.

Zoochy Wed Apr 29, 2015 04:14pm

I am just saying....
 
Who thinks there will be a rule about player in a marked lane space for a free throw that breaks the free throw line before the ball contacts the Rim or Backboard?

Nevadaref Wed Apr 29, 2015 05:08pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zoochy (Post 961504)
Who thinks there will be a rule about player in a marked lane space for a free throw that breaks the free throw line before the ball contacts the Rim or Backboard?

I've already gone on record that there will be because the IAABO guy on the committee wants to make himself retroactively correct.

BillyMac Wed Apr 29, 2015 05:54pm

IAABO Versus NFHS ...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Zoochy (Post 961504)
Who thinks there will be a rule about player in a marked lane space for a free throw that breaks the free throw line before the ball contacts the Rim or Backboard?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevadaref (Post 961509)
I've already gone on record that there will be because the IAABO guy on the committee wants to make himself retroactively correct.

I thought so too, but this rule change was not on the agenda. Maybe it will be considered as an editorial change, or a clarification?

Nevadaref Wed Apr 29, 2015 06:01pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 961513)
I thought so too, but this rule change was not on the agenda. Maybe it will be considered as an editorial change, or a clarification?

Or one of those "unannounced" changes! ;)

Raymond Thu Apr 30, 2015 08:58am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevadaref (Post 961509)
I've already gone on record that there will be because the IAABO guy on the committee wants to make himself retroactively correct.

So we are going to be calling a lot of T's for dead ball contact since we have to call the violation first?

Adam Thu Apr 30, 2015 01:48pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 961523)
So we are going to be calling a lot of T's for dead ball contact since we have to call the violation first?

Nope, the ball is still live (I know you know this) since it's a "delayed dead ball."

Raymond Thu Apr 30, 2015 02:39pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adam (Post 961542)
Nope, the ball is still live (I know you know this) since it's a "delayed dead ball."

So we are conceivably going to give A1 a new shot for missed the free throw, then additional free throws for the foul. I prefer just to call the foul, but I'm flexible. :D

Adam Thu Apr 30, 2015 02:56pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 961547)
So we are conceivably going to give A1 a new shot for missed the free throw, then additional free throws for the foul. I prefer just to call the foul, but I'm flexible. :D

Conceivably. By rule, if you call the foul, you're going to have to call the violation as well. I'm with you, but then again, just calling a couple of these violations will take care of the problem, too.

so cal lurker Thu Apr 30, 2015 03:38pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adam (Post 961549)
Conceivably. By rule, if you call the foul, you're going to have to call the violation as well. I'm with you, but then again, just calling a couple of these violations will take care of the problem, too.

And what problem is that? Is there some epidemic of defenders bowling over free throw shooters that I missed? Seems to me this is nothing more than a solution looking for a problem . . .

Camron Rust Thu Apr 30, 2015 03:46pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by so cal lurker (Post 961552)
And what problem is that? Is there some epidemic of defenders bowling over free throw shooters that I missed? Seems to me this is nothing more than a solution looking for a problem . . .

Exactly, what advantage is the defender getting by crossing the line but not fouling? If they foul, call it. The shot will be long gone by the time the defender gets there. No need for violation that doesn't fix anything.

BillyMac Thu Apr 30, 2015 03:49pm

IAABO Free Throw Restriction ...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by so cal lurker (Post 961552)
Seems to me this is nothing more than a solution looking for a problem . . .

At our local IAABO interpretation meeting (new rules) back in the fall, we were told to ignore any contact as incidental unless it's intentional, or flagrant.

Here' what the IAABO Power Point slide actually stated:

If there is contact on the free throw shooter by the defender who breaks the free throw line plane, ignore contact unless intentional. (9-1-3-B)

Adam Thu Apr 30, 2015 05:04pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by so cal lurker (Post 961552)
And what problem is that? Is there some epidemic of defenders bowling over free throw shooters that I missed? Seems to me this is nothing more than a solution looking for a problem . . .

I don't see a problem, but they never ask me. I could see them adding this in an effort to "clean up" the shots, or as an issue of fairness. If the shooter can't leave, no one else can enter.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:47am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1