Quote:
Originally posted by rainmaker
Quote:
Originally posted by zebraman
Quote:
Originally posted by rainmaker
I"M picking and choosing?!?!? What rule have I "picked and chosen" here? I'm baffled!
See Case 7.5.2. You're saying it's okay for Rich to go against that?!
Please don't give me the routine about "rulebook" officials bringing problems on themselves. That's just hogwash.
[Edited by rainmaker on Nov 2nd, 2005 at 07:20 PM]
|
You supported ignoring the T for the 6 players but insist that you must enforce the rule for giving the ball to the wrong team. I suppose you've never chosen common sense over a specific rule? Hogwash yourself.  We all do it. But that's different because we have to walk a mile in our own shoes.
How many T's did you call for an elbow that hit nothing but air before they changed that rule to a violation? If you called a bunch, you were the only one I know enforcing that rule regularly.
Z
|
6 players? Who's talking about 6 players? I thought the subject was a throw-in by the wrong team?
I rarely choose "common sense" over a rule. Even when I do something that isn't in the rule book, it's according to my interpreter. I find that common sense varies from person to person and is not to be relied on. The rules as interpreted locally are much more solid footing.
In fact, yes, I have given T's for the elbows, and for 6 on the floor, and I've apologized for not being able to have a do-over on giving the ball to the wrong team. And if anyone ever complained to my assignor that I was being "a rulebook official" he said, "Good. That's what we work toward."
But none of that answers my question to you. Am I picking and choosing? You didn't give any specifics. And you said nothing about my case book reference. The sitch at the beginning of this thread is described exactly in the case book, and the clear answer is there, too. There's nothing gray about it.
|
Sometimes choosing the gray is better than choosing the black and white. That's how I read what zebraman posted.
I see this happened in Indiana. Maybe those officials have problems, but I applaud how they handled the specific situation mentioned here. It's fair and it's equitable, regardless of case 17.58.21.