Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nevadaref
Look out folks, I am going to AGREE whole-heartedly with Rut on this point! 
Why the NFHS issues these rulings and fails to insert them into the case book and keep them there each successive year is a mystery to me. Perhaps it cuts down on the number of pages in the books and thus saves them some money in printing cost. If that's the reason, it is certainly a poor one, especially when compared to the value of having a clear ruling for these situations in print and available to current officials. The very least the NFHS could do is create an archive of these past interpretations on its website and make that accessible to the public.
The NFHS drops the ball, in my opinion, whenever they do this. |
This is not unlike court cases. The legislature writes the laws, people take the issues to court. The court writes their ruling on the matter. That ruling stands until a higher court says otherwise or the lawmakers change the law.
Interpretations are written to help understand what the rule was meant to do....just like court decisions. Those interpretations do not change just because a new opinion is not published in the current year. It stands until some action occurs to change it.
Should it be in the casebook? Perhaps. The case book would be several times the size it is today if they did put ALL prior (and still valid) interpretations in. Those that are the most commonly faces and the most interesting do get in...but not all. Personally, I will all of them were there with notes about the year they were published. It would make it easier.