Where are the NFHS rule changes?

[APG]

My thing with this session of deciding on rules/mechanics/signals, I don't even think there had to be too many drastic rules changes (though what was asked of us in the survey suggested that big changes will be in the way in the future)...

If you don't want to change too much this year rules wise, is it too much to add some f'n signals to the book?! There are so many common signals that could have been added especially this year...borrowed from the pro/college ranks, that are easy and give clear information. Off the topic of my head:

Hit to the head
Hook
Armbar
Two hands on the dribbler
Trip
Chuck
Violation of verticality (some would say the frankenstein signal)

I'm probably forgetting a signal or two (punch all "offensive fouls" or fists for a blocking foul)...but the point is we could add so many more signals that would more clearly denote what type of foul is called...

Yet they add a signal that officials have been using for at least 10 years already. Most officials are gonna see that "change" and think it was already in the books already.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by APG

My thing with this session of deciding on rules/mechanics/signals, I don't even think there had to be too many drastic rules changes (though what was asked of us in the survey suggested that big changes will be in the way in the future)...

If you don't want to change too much this year rules wise, is it too much to add some f'n signals to the book?! There are so many common signals that could have been added especially this year...borrowed from the pro/college ranks, that are easy and give clear information. Off the topic of my head:

Hit to the head
Hook
Armbar
Two hands on the dribbler
Trip
Chuck
Violation of verticality (some would say the frankenstein signal)

I'm probably forgetting a signal or two (punch all "offensive fouls" or fists for a blocking foul)...but the point is we could add so many more signals that would more clearly denote what type of foul is called...

Yet they add a signal that officials have been using for at least 10 years already. Most officials are gonna see that "change" and think it was already in the books already.

+1. Like I said before, the irony for me is that the evaluated perception of my game is better when I do use these signals to more effectively communicate. Occasionally I stumble across a federation purist who reads me the riot act regarding "approved signals," and I pretend to care, keep my mouth shut, and then move on. Oddly, my schedule continues to improve each year, anyway.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by APG

My thing with this session of deciding on rules/mechanics/signals, I don't even think there had to be too many drastic rules changes (though what was asked of us in the survey suggested that big changes will be in the way in the future)...

If you don't want to change too much this year rules wise, is it too much to add some f'n signals to the book?! There are so many common signals that could have been added especially this year...borrowed from the pro/college ranks, that are easy and give clear information. Off the topic of my head:

Hit to the head
Hook
Armbar
Two hands on the dribbler
Trip
Chuck
Violation of verticality (some would say the frankenstein signal)

Why do they need a signal for this...

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by APG

... is it too much to add some f'n signals to the book?

I give these (below) signal suggestions to IAABO every year, and get rejected every year.

1) Change “Delayed Lane Violation” to “Delayed Dead Ball: Withheld Whistle” to allow for delayed free throw violations that do not involve a lane violation, i.e. disconcertion, or three point arc violation.

Rationale: Presently, IAABO does not have a signal for delayed violations such as disconcertion, or a three point arc violation. IAABO only has a signal for a delayed violation on a lane violation.



2) Add supplemental “Intentional Foul: Excessive Contact” signal.

Rationale: Adding this signal to the chart will allow officials to differentiate between intentional fouls for “excessive contact with an opponent while playing the ball” from the other types of intentional fouls.



3) Change “Five Second Closely Guarded”” to “Five Second Closely Guarded And Five Second Throwin Violation”

Rationale: Presently, there is no signal on the IAABO chart for a five second throwin violation. It’s the same signal for a five second closely guarded violation, but it’s not specifically described in the IAABO signal chart label.



4) Add “Shooter Has Foot Touching Three Point Line” signal.

Rationale: This signal has been used in Connecticut successfully for several years. It gives coaches, fans, and scorekeepers more information than the signals that we presently use for three point attempts. With this signal, coaches, fans, and scorekeepers will know, for sure, that the successful attempt will only be two points.