Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
This can be a little complicated. I am of the feeling that when things change the NF should update either those interpretations or put them in the book ... referencing an 8 or 9-year-old interpretation but not getting any clarification on how or if it still applies ... officials that are newer coming to the game, they are not likely aware of any such standard ... It would be nice to get things they considered that are updated in the current literature or do a better job providing references to this information ... where we would find the interpretations posted on this site anywhere else ... limit the confusion if the NF put more information out or at the very least posted it somewhere on their website.
|
... posted and edited every year (removing invalid interpretations, maybe with an announcement of such).
Agree. Well said. Stupid NFHS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
Sometimes other rules change the scenario or the possible interpretation, so there is often not an update of those interpretations that are in conflict with the newer rules or changes ...
|
Those of us that believe that old interpretations, and old Points of Emphasis, not in the current NFHS Rulebook and/or NFHS Casebook, are still valid fully realize that newer rule changes and/or newer interpretations can, and do, invalidate such old interpretations, and old Points of Emphasis.
However, to JRutledge's valid point, the longer one officiates, the harder it is to keep track of such.
I've always said that learning the rules was the easy part (forty years ago for me). Keeping track of the many changes over the years is the hard part.
There are a few changes that I have to stop and think about almost every time I encounter them, real game, or an exam (arrow after jump ball caught by jumper, arrow after alternating possession throwin kicked by defender).