[grantsrc]

Walt-
No offense to you but how many times are we going to have this same topic/post? This idea comes up time after time on forum after forum and we just can't seem to make any headway on this topic.

A topic was posted on the Fed forum about having knowledge that goes beyond the letter of the law (rule books). I think that we, as officials, need to step back and look at the intent of this rule. The Fed adopted this in order to stop A from gaining an advantage from the hide out play. Obivously, if B covers a WO that hasn't come inside the marks B is not being deceived. Now, should we mention something to the coach/player about this. Probably. Should we flag it the first time we see it? I don't think so. If B recognizes the WO and defends him= no flag. If B doesn't see him and there is an obvious advantage gained then yes, we should flag A. Hard to identify at first but this is something where we, as officials, need to step back and look at the bigger picture.

My personal opinion, this rule will be changed or modified to answer these types of situations. Not sure how, but I think it will.