View Single Post
  #42 (permalink)  
Old Thu Aug 23, 2007, 03:44pm
Nevadaref Nevadaref is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 15,003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref
That is exactly the point which I am striving to make with these two plays. For NFHS and NCAA, we have this nice four-point checklist, but it is not a true substitute for the text of the rule. When one wants to really get the facts, one must go to the actual text.


Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins
I disagree that the "actual text" is always correct. We have case plays that "clarify" the wording -- and are inconsistent with it. In general (or at least frequently), the case play overrides the text. We also have the "must understand the intent of the rules" guidleins, which implies that the literal reading of the rules is not always correct.
Obviously, I don't agree with that position, bob. I do not deny that there are some case plays which are inconsistent with the rules. I simply take the position that those case plays are wrong and that the people who wrote them did a poor job of interpreting the text. They eventually should be overturned. It is my opinion that the actual text always carries more weight than some play ruling because that's what the RULE is.

This is the way constitutional law works.
Reply With Quote