Quote:
Originally posted by Kajun Ref N Texas
That exactly counters 7-5-7, which states that the team only retains this right following common fouls.
|
That's my point. One interp supports 7-5-7 and the other contradicts it.
Quote:
Originally posted by Kajun Ref N Texas
Nevada,
With all due respect you keep putting the word "only" into 7-5-7 and it does not appear in the rule.
7-5-7 (in part) reads:
"A team retains this privilege (running the end line) if the scoring team commits a violation or common foul (before the throw-in ends and before the bonus is in effect) and the ensuing throw-in spot would have been on the end line."
The word "only" is not found in that rule.
Double fouls are simply not addressed in rule 7-5-7, as such we follow the POI rules of double fouls.
Intentional and flagrant fouls can be differentiated because they involve free throws and NO provision of POI.
In general, in this forum, I think we hold so tightly to the letter of the law (rules) that we sometimes forget to look at the spirit of the law when applying rules to situations.
|
I don't know how long you have been officiating HS basketball, but this has to do with the history of this rule over the past few years. So in order to properly respond to your post, I need to cover the evolution of this rule.
Back in 2001-02 7-5-7 was first changed to permit a team to retain the running privilege. The rule was worded differently in its first form. It said, "A team retains this privilege if the scoring team commits a violation or foul (before the bonus is in effect) on the ensuing throw-in if the resulting throw-in spot would be on the endline."
Notice the phrase "on the ensuing throw-in."
While this original version made it clear that the foul or violation had to occur on the throw-in, it failed to account for the scoring team fouling or violating prior to that throw-in. Therefore, the NFHS made another change the very next season.
So, in 2002-03 the rule became "A team retains this privilege if the scoring team commits a violation or foul (before the bonus is in effect) and the ensuing throw-in spot would be on the endline."
Now this wording covered offenses prior to and during the throw-in. Unfortunately, since it didn't specify a time frame, some people interpreted the rule to mean that a team could still run even when being fouled near the end line AFTER completing the throw-in. That is not the correct understanding.
Finally in 2004-05 the word "common" was added to describe the type of foul, giving us our current wording.
At the front of the rules book that season under the heading, "2004-05 Major Editorial Changes" there appeared, "7-5-7 Clarified that a team will retain end-line run privileges after a violation or common foul."
So why would the NFHS need to issue a clarification which added the word "common" unless they intended to except other types of fouls? That is why I wrote only common fouls. That is obviously the purpose of the NFHS clarification.
Also, that interp which I labelled play 1 in an earlier post in this thread was issued that same season by the NFHS.