[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by tomegun

That doesn't make a difference to me. I guess I put that in the post to show that in my position I wasn't going to argue or debate. I didn't make the call because I agree with your logic and I still do. Now that I've looked up the definition of volition I agree with you even more. The definition is "The act or an instance of making a conscious choice or decision." So I'm sitting here thinking that it needs to be spelled out better or more examples should have been presented other than the double screen example. That example would fit the definition of "own volition." I'm a newbie in another conference that the supervisor/ref is in. If could become a delicate situation. [/B]

When this NCAA change was announced I immediately said that it was vague and unclear. The wording makes it seem like what Jay Bilas said is right. (Can't be the first to touch after being OOB.) While I understand that the NCAA wanted to change the rule so that going OOB was penalized with only a violation instead of a T, as in NFHS play, I can't believe that they intended to negate good hustle plays.

I'll add that an experienced DII guy stated in his pregame in CA this weekend that there was a new rule making it a violation to go out of bounds and come back in and be the first to touch the ball. When I brought up the own volition language, he said that we would have to make a decision and if the player is forced out just make sure that we have a foul. This makes me think that even the conference rules interpreters are unclear on the scope of the new rule.