|
From Carl-
This is a standard "don't blame us" notification. In its expanded form, it appeared this year for the first time.
The NFHS grants permission for states to modify the rules in certain explicitly stated areas, which I listed earlier. If that were not true, why would the book name rules that can be modified?
In 1984 the Texas state association (UIIL) refused to adopt the no-metal-spikes rule. We lost our admission slip to the annual rules meeting. We didn't get it back until the NFHS removed the ban on metal spikes in 1989. The message: If you modify in areas other than those permitted, you may suffer consequences.
But individual associations within a state do not have that right of modification, and state associations that do modify the rules circularize in writing all umpires in the state.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OMG, ROTFLMAO!!!
This is the pinnacle of recalcitrance. You asked for where the NFHS notifies states that they may modify the rules. I gave it to you and you throw up the smoke and mirrors again. Even Brad can see through this charade!
It is not a boilerplate or standard disclaimer. How could it be standard when you admitted that it's very existence is new? Good Lord, you just can't admit it. When did I ever (or for that matter anyone else) insinuate that individual groups are permitted to change the rules. I gave numerous examples of rules that are ignored by school conferences, umpire groups and leagues, but I never encouraged it. These things occur everywhere - even the Lone Star state. A few years ago, Fed tried to ban throwing the ball around after a strikeout. Illinois said that they would not enforce it. Enough other states barked and it went away. Maybe that will happen with other controversial plays. One can only pray that Anthony and Bob are reading this.
Again, you twist the facts to suit your ego. The sentence reads: "Member associations of the NFHS independently may make decisions regarding compliance with or modification of these playing rules for the student-athletes in their respective states." Where does it say anything about your suspect list of rules? Those items in the back of the book are specifically mentioned, so that states can choose to adopt them en masse or without much forethought. The next paragraph further promotes state association amendment and modification for special needs.
Admit it, if Idaho wanted to disallow the DH, they could do it. They would face no ramifications. You bring up a pre-TASO story and expect us to just say, "Yep, the great and mighty Carl has spoken, it must be true." C'mon out from behind the curtain, the smoke is clouding your judgement. 1984???
Everyone here can read the 2005 statement. Remember, you've said that if it's written in the book, it must be important. Page one, in an emphasis box...that looks pretty substantial to me. I want thank a very popoular rules interpreter (no, not from Illinois) for emailing me about this. Apparently he actually read the book.
Again, an apology is in order. You were wrong and accused me of misspeaking. You are perilously close to losing face.
[Edited by WhatWuzThatBlue on Oct 30th, 2005 at 09:20 AM]
|