2014 Unannounced Changes? (e.g. Casebook 4.14.1 Sit. D)

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Nice citation Mark T, DeNucci.

In theory I agree with you, but I've always viewed specific casebook plays as "trumping" anything generic in the rulebook. It appears that the fact that the coach was not notified and that the "five foul player" made some free throws is now considered to be a correctable error.

Or, as most of us have assumed, it might just be that someone wrote a case play without reviewing the rules or consulting someone else who had.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Adam

Or, as most of us have assumed, it might just be that someone wrote a case play without reviewing the rules or consulting someone else who had.

It happens all too often for that to not be the case!

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Nice citation Mark T, DeNucci.

In theory I agree with you, but I've always viewed specific casebook plays as "trumping" anything generic in the rulebook. It appears that the fact that the coach was not notified and that the "five foul player" made some free throws is now considered to be a correctable error.

But not with the CB Play cannot be defended by rule.

MTD, Sr.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

But not with the CB Play cannot be defended by rule.

I'm on my way to work, so I don't have time to think of one, and I can't think of one off the top of my head, but aren't there a few casebook plays that are "free standing" and have no rule backing, or may actually "go against the grain" of a written rule?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Adam

...it might just be that someone wrote a case play without reviewing the rules or consulting someone else who had.

That's crazy talk. This is the NFHS. Something like that would never happen.