[QUOTE]
Originally posted by rpwall
Quote:
Originally posted by mick
Quote:
rpwall,
I don't think we, as officials, need the POE to make the correct judgement. Yes, the jump stop looks sloppy at times. Yes, the jump stop may be allowed if it is close.
Yet, it's our job to make it allowed when it is legal.
Adding a few paragraphs in the book, or not, shouldn't be the guiding lines as to whether we will call the action rightly, or wrongly.
mick
|
I agree that certain parts of the rulebook should not have to be emphasized ... but .. the fact is that there is no ambuguity in the rulebook about handchecking or rough post-play but we still have POE's in those areas. POE's seem to come to life when officials allow some things to go to the point where the game takes on a dimension (e.g., physical play) not envisioned by the keepers-of-the-rules.
I think the jump stop fits into that category ... to begin with, it is a contrivance that has to be specifically defined in the rules as being legal ... otherwise, IMHO it would be a travel ... and if the enforcement of it is lax, then we have stretched something that is a stretch of pivot foot restrictions in the first place.
|
rpwall,
I like your thoughts about dimension, contrivance and stretching interpretations. I think you're right on.
And yet, the only officials that will even bother with the POE are the one's that probably call it correctly without the POE.
Will the Coaches read 'em? Will the lazy officials read 'em?
Do they even know they are there?
mick