Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
So does that mean the NF will approve all those interpretations or will this be an IAABO thing that they will not cross-check? So if something contradicts current rules basis on something done 18 years ago, who is going to make sure we are not giving contradictory information?
|
To start, it will be up to the IAABO committee formed (if it is formed) for this purpose to separate vanished, but still valid interpretations; from those vanished because they are no longer valid interpretations.
Hopefully this will be double checked by the NFHS before being "published".
Will there be errors? With, or without, the input of NFHS, of course there will errors, but these will eventually be weeded out.
Even with errors, it's still better than what we have now with the official position of the NFHS that, as long as there are no relevant rule changes, or interpretation changes, to invalidate such, old vanished interpretations are still officially considered to be valid by the NFHS.
Without a database, that leaves us with a Wild Wild West scenario, with local interpreters (trainers), or state interpreters (trainers), IAABO affiliated, or not IAABO affiliated, making individual and unilateral decisions about the validity of a vanished interpretations, deciding individually and unilaterally whether relevant rule changes, or interpretation changes, have occurred.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
I find that rather funny that the NF does not have resources to simply put out information they previously published ...
|
I do too, but it's a labor intensive endeavor. The collection of old ("previously published") interpretations is the easy part, it's the editing for continued validly that's the hard part. And don't forget, the NFHS covers about two dozen different sports.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
Sounds like something they just do not want to do or causes them issues if something contradicts current information.
|
Lindsey Atkinson, the new NFHS rules editor for basketball, stated that as long as there are no relevant rule changes, or interpretation changes, to invalidate such, old vanished interpretations are still officially considered to be valid by the NFHS.
She stated this not only to IAABO, but to other organizations (according to Camron Rust) as well.
It appears that Ms. Atkinson, and the NFHS, is willing to talk the talk, but is not willing to walk the walk, choosing theory over practice.
So do we believe in her support of this concept? Time will tell.
