Quote:
Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Dan_ref:
Team A scores. Team B is entitled to a throw-in anywhere along the endline in its backcourt. How can Team B interfere with the ball on its throw-in? That is a rhetorical question. The answer is: It cannot interfere with the ball on its throw-in.
As I stated before, the rule was adopted because officials were all over the spectrum on how to handle the situation when Team A interfered with the ball after it had just scored. Some officials would tell Team A to stop being naughty lads or lassies. Some officials were correctly charging the offending player on Team A a technical foul for delay of game. It was my opinion and that of many interpreters that the delay of technical foul was the correct way to handle this situation. So the NFHS finally decided something had to be done and adopted the rule that we now see in the rules.
The college scenario that I described is applicable to your complaint of me dropping names. Who cares if the scenario I use involves college officials or high school officials, some of whom are lucky enough to hear the Rules Editor speak every year.
I would like to once again to ask you to join IAABO. Just email me through Officiating.com or at [email protected] and I will get you an application for membership in IAABO. In fact I would like to extend my invitation to all officials who are not members of IAABO to join it. You can go to the IAABO website and download an application form.
Its getting late and I need to get my beauty sleep (about ten years worht). Good night everybody.
|
Mark, are you having trouble with the English language
tonight? I already said I am an IAABO member. Further,
you keep repeating the same answer ("because I said so",
otherwise known as proof by vigorous declaration). I
know why the rule was put in the NF book. I also know that
it does not explicitely exclude warning the scoring team.
If this was the well thought out answer to a well known
problem why was it so poorly worded?