|
|||
2009 NFHS Football Questionnaire
Here are the questions from the 2009 NFHS Football Questionnaire:
PART I — CHECKUP ON PRESENT 2009 NFHS FOOTBALL RULES ARE THESE CHANGES SATISFACTORY? 1. Requiring that all field markings must be clearly visible. 2. Clarifying that stripes located on the football must be adjacent to and perpendicular to the seam upon which the laces are stitched. 3. Clarifying that the definition of a scrimmage-kick formation to differentiate formations that have been used traditionally for attempting a field goal or kick try from those used for a punt and what can be done on first, second, third and fourth downs. 4. Stipulating that the mandatory three-minute warm-up period begins immediately following the conclusion of the halftime intermission. 5. Clarifying that if a penalty resulting in a safety occurs on the last timed down of a period, the period is not extended. 6. Three rules were refined and a new article created regarding penalty enforcement for dead-ball, non-player or unsportsmanlike fouls that occur during or after a touchdown scoring play. 7. Making it illegal to grasp the opponent’s chin strap. 8. Defining a horse-collar tackle and adding it to the list of illegal personal contact fouls, regardless of where it occurs on the field. 9. Clarifying that the kicking team cannot bat a scrimmage kick that has not yet been grounded unless it is toward its own goal line. 10. Defined a restricted area where a maximum of three coaches may communicate with players and substitutes during dead-ball situations. PART II — OBSERVATIONS – ARE THESE ITEMS A MAJOR PROBLEM IN YOUR AREA? 1. Bands playing after the ready-for-play signal. 2. Inappropriate or excessive face painting. 3. Number or location of bands being worn on the arms more than three inches from the base of the thumb. 4. Uniform pants and knee pads not covering the knees at the snap or free kick. 5. Inconsistent enforcement of the restricted area on sidelines. 6. The number of players on either side of the kicker on a free kick. 7. The questionable use of electronic equipment by teams during contests (i.e., coach communication from video location, Internet use in the press box, etc.). 8. Football helmet coming off during live play. PART III — ABOUT RULES FOR 2010 – WOULD YOU FAVOR? 1. Double fouls when the ball is dead would offset as opposed to separate and in order. 2. Changing the definition of a chop block to eliminate the requirement that the low block be delayed to be illegal. 3. Changing the definition of a chop block to only restrict the high/low combination (low/low would be legal). 4. Changing the kickoff to the 35-yard line. 5. Allowing corporate advertising to be on the field of play if in compliance with other Rule 1-2 restrictions. 6. Removing the restriction that football jerseys have to be tucked in if longer than the top of the pant. 7. Requiring a minimum number of players on either side of the kicker on a free kick. 8. Further clarifying the use of electronic equipment during a contest. 9. Eliminating the five-yard face-mask foul. 10. Removing the penalty-marker colored restrictions on football gloves and pads. |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
So what the change would do would be eliminate the tough call of a bang-bang pair of dead ball fouls with a spot close to a goal line (as to which occurred first), at the cost of possibly introducing another tough call when the fouls are separated more in time. |
|
|||
Sure seems to be the way Fed is trending isn't it?
__________________
Even if you’re on the right track, you’ll get run over if you just sit there. - Will Rogers |
|
|||
Just a personal observation, but the flexibility and reliance on individual judgment adapting to circumstance, inherent to the NFHS code, seems more adaptable to the general skill level and execution capability of the middle and high school general population.
As much as some would like to believe, the 12-18 year old athlete is simply not as mature as the 18-24 year old athlete who should be able to master a different level of complexity and the higher requirements and ammenities of actual competition at the collegiate level. Having rules codes designed specifically for these different levels, with their different capabilities, generally makes sense and has worked pretty well for multiple generations of student athletes. The current system certainly "ain't broke". |
|
|||
I don't necessarily disagree though Texas and Massachusetts have both adapted NCAA rules for their middle school and high school football programs and it seems to work fine for them.
I was simply making an observation that NFHS rule changes seem to be trending towards the NCAA rules lately.
__________________
Even if you’re on the right track, you’ll get run over if you just sit there. - Will Rogers |
|
|||
Change enforcement of live ball fouls by A behind the previous spot to previous spot enforcement...like NCAA
Change and clarify that a reciever must come down in bounds for a completetion to occur (regardless of opponent pushing him OOB while he is in the air.) I'm sure there are a few others that need tweaking. May the blessings of Christ be on you all this Christmas season!! |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
Various state HSAAs and local leagues had started to make separate adaptations of NCAA rules before Fed developed their own adaptation of same. So it was really a matter of developing 2 codes in widespread use rather than many more in narrower use. For years Fed & NCAA had a liaison committee for football, yet they didn't achieve a significant net reduction in their rules differences. Not that they were necessarily trying for that; it was more like, let's look over these things together. |
|
|||
Quote:
Considering the overall audience, which includes student athletes, coaches, administrators and spectators there seems to be an understandable objective in keeping rules of the game in more of a Yes-No, On-Off, Black-White situation, with fewer exceptions and nuances. There is (at least supposedly) more of an emphasis on overall academics at the HS level. With some glaring exceptions in some areas and specific schools, the majority of HS Coaches, and their staffs, have additional teaching requirements apart from athletics and are unable, although many valiantly try, to devote their full attention, effort and focus to the same level common to the collegiate level. I think it safe to suggest, in general, HS athletic programs have access to less funding, ammenities, facilities and flexibility than would be fairly standard at the collegiate level. It seems concern over reducing complexity and, considering recent technological advancements directed towards, microscopic precision as related to officiating decisions is much more a concern at the more advanced levels of the game (excluding spectators and amateur experts). Many of the accoutrements the general public has become so accustomed to at the higher levels of the game (24 second clocks, Instant Replay, Winning is everything, losing is unacceptable, absence of real sportsmanship, individuality over team and the necessity to deflect any personal responsibility for lack of success) simply aren’t intended to be significant at the HS level, reducing the necessity of many of these "trappings". Actually, any real concern over how difficult, or not, rule construction is on officiating, at the HS level, seems pretty far down on the priority list, which in the overall picture probably isn’t such a bad thing, or that big a deal (generally). |
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Pass interference by Team A: 15 yards from the previous spot [S33]. Pass interference by Team B: Team A’s ball at the spot of the foul, first down, if the foul occurs fewer than 15 yards beyond the previous spot. If the foul occurs 15 or more yards beyond the previous spot, Team A’s ball, first down, 15 yards from the previous spot [S33]. When the ball is snapped on or inside the Team B 17-yard line and outside the Team B two-yard line, and the spot of the foul is on or inside the two-yard line, the penalty from the previous spot shall place the ball at the two-yard line, first down (A.R. 7-3-8-XVII). No penalty enforced from outside the two-yard line may place the ball inside the two-yard line (Exception: Rule 10-2- 5-b). If the previous spot was on or inside the two-yard line, first down halfway between the previous spot and the goal line (Rule 10-2-6 Exception). Now NFHS... 15 yards plus loss of down if by A – (S9) – if by B, it is first down for A. With so many officials having problems with the rules why would the rules makers want to make things more complicated? |
|
|||
Quote:
I didn't "leave off officials" as a reason for keeping the rules simple, I just think the other examples are more important to rule design. I won't argue with your suggestion that not all HS football officials are as competent as they could be, but I'm afraid that is a recognized problem at the NCAA level as well, as is true with most professions. Improvement at both levels is an never ending, ongoing priority. |
|
|||
Quote:
Of course AJMC could say that even if they said that's what they were trying for doesn't mean they really mean it, or that even if they really mean it, they actually achieve it. |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
2009-2010 Rules Changes NFHS | Forksref | Basketball | 9 | Tue Oct 13, 2009 09:57pm |
2009-10 NFHS Rules Changes | shishstripes | Basketball | 7 | Mon May 11, 2009 01:17pm |
2009 NFHS Rules Changes | jaybird | Football | 0 | Fri Apr 17, 2009 11:49pm |
2009 Rule Changes NFHS | 3SPORT | Softball | 36 | Fri Jul 04, 2008 03:51pm |
NEW - 2003 NFHS Football Rule Changes (as written by the NFHS Rules Committee) | KWH | Football | 27 | Tue Jan 21, 2003 11:30am |