Quote:
Originally posted by ljudge
BBR: I totally agree with you and realize the rule hasn't changed. I was asking if there was a misprint because the wording has changed, yet wasn't noted. I wasn't to concerned about that more than I was about understanding the proper enforcement for an IS nonplayer foul during 4th down. Is my enforcement correct based on the comment in the case book is what I'm trying to find out.
|
It doesn't matter. My point is, don't change anything about the way you've beene handling this play. When these things happen, our association discusses it. Then, we rue on it as we aways have and await the change in next year's publication.
Just like the rule change last year - a foul against A before a change of possession on a scoring play was still enforced. Our state director told us that this was wrong, that the rule was not published the way that it was approved, and a correction would be made this year. He told us the foul isn't enforced. Guess what? We have the correction this year and he was correct.
And actually, this isn't unusual. Quite often, the committee, or maybe the editor, takes it upon themsleves to reword a section and not include it in the editorial changes. Once it's published, questions start being raised and suddeenly, it's apparent why the rulke was worded the way that it was.
So I know it can be confusing but the best thing to do is just to ignore it.