Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
I do not give a darn about old interpretations. They cannot put it somewhere, it does not matter to me personally. I really do not see the obsession over them anyway.
|
I can certainly understand JRutledge's point, especially in regard to how a new official gets exposure to an interpretation that isn't presently published somewhere, anywhere, in any current official NFHS document.
However, the NFHS does this to us all the time.
Annual NFHS interpretations are publicized for a single year and then disappear from subsequent official NFHS documents (good example: 2009-10 SITUATION 11, An Obvious Timing Mistake Corrected). Happens every year. Does this mean that single year NFHS annual interpretations (assuming there are no subsequent relevant NFHS rule changes, no subsequent relevant NFHS retractions, or no subsequent relevant revised NFHS annual interpretations) subsequently become null and void?
Annual NFHS Points of Emphasis (good example: 2012-13, Contact Above The Shoulders) may be publicized for a single year (sometimes they reappear) and then often disappear from subsequent official NFHS documents. Happens all the time. Does this mean that single year NFHS Points of Emphasis (assuming there are no subsequent relevant NFHS rule changes, no subsequent relevant NFHS retractions, or no subsequent relevant revised NFHS interpretations) subsequently become null and void?
NFHS Casebook Plays sometimes disappear, unannounced, unpublicized, for no apparent reason other than to possibly save space, at which point they then disappear from subsequent official NFHS documents (good example: 2004-05 NFHS Casebook, 10.6.1 SITUATION E, Player On Floor). Does this mean that a NFHS Casebook Play that disappears, unannounced, unpublicized, for no apparent reason (assuming there are no subsequent relevant NFHS rule changes, no subsequent relevant NFHS retractions, or no subsequent relevant revised NFHS Casebook Plays) subsequently become null and void?
Yes, I know that it's very difficult, possibly impossible, for a new official to get exposure to an old annual interpretation, old Point of Emphasis, or old casebook play, that isn't presently published somewhere, anywhere, in any current official NFHS document, but I don't believe that it's appropriate for those of us who are veterans, who have been to many rodeos, who have been around the block many times, who know these old interpretations, to pretend that they never existed, to ignore them, and to rule contrary to them (assuming there are no subsequent relevant NFHS rule changes, subsequent NFHS retractions, or subsequent revised NFHS interpretations).
The stupid NFHS does this to us all the time.