Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Quote:
Originally posted by hawkk
gee whiz Mark is getting beat up on here. His point seems awfully simple and -- gasp -- common-sensical: interpreters have decided to MANDATE a call that is impossible to be the RIGHT call in an objective sense -- i.e. an all-knowing, all-seeing ref would NEVER call a blarge.
|
Nope, that's completely wrong. The rules makers-i.e. the NFHS Rules Committee- made a RULE tells us how they want us to handle the blarges if one is called. All the interpreters are doing is following the rules explicitly. There is absolutely no other way that that particular rule could possibly be interpreted. That's common sense.
What MTD said is not only completely wrong according to the rules, but it's about as nonsensical as you could possibly get imo. He trying to tell us that a rule that is in the book really isn't in the book.
|
Not at all. MTD is not saying that rule is not in the book. He's saying that rule is there, just as you say, to get us out of a predicament when two officials call opposite calls. If it is block vs. charge, one is wrong...but which one. Its a double foul by declaration due to the equality of the officials in authority of calling fouls...not because both players actually fouled.
Said again, if you have torso to torso contact and one official calls a block while another calls a charge, it can't truly be both...but is declared so by rule.