|
Good post 30 Nevada as well as followup from crosscountry.
Some other cases got me thinking too:
Case 4.19.7 SIT D. It is mostly the same play (deflected throw-in) except after the deflection, there is an offensive or more specifically, a TC foul. The case explains that Team A was in control during the throw-in and therefore it is a TC foul. Notice the word "during." even though throw-in ended. For some reason, rule 4-12-6 is cited.
Also, case 4.19.8 SIT F gives more info. Ball released on a throw-in by Team A and there is a double foul. Since the throw-in had not ended, POI is throw-in by Team A. Here, the NFHS clearly points out that the throw-in had not ended and thus, Team A gets another throw-in and they cite 4-36-2b.
Yes, they involve fouls, not IWs. They use words however that get the brain spinning. NFHS needs to be clearer for sure.
__________________
If some rules are never enforced, then why do they exist? 
|