|
Case plays have been known to contradict each other. There are a couple of reasons for this.
a. When a new case play is added the editor and current members of the rules committee often don't make an exhaustive, or even accurate, search of existing play rulings which will be affected.
b. As the years go by the committee members change and these individuals have different opinions on certain situations. When a new group of individuals adds a new case play, it may not match up with what was previously written.
c. We know what year rule changes were made, but it is more difficult to pinpoint the year in which certain case plays were first published. This makes it nearly impossible to know which one should have priority when they disagree. As the years pass, no one other than MTD, can tell you which came first.
d. The game evolves and certain actions that once were rare become common. Players use different tactics and the officials and rules makers must learn to cope with them. Sometimes the older language in the books isn't well-suited to handle the newer practices.
You have certainly found something in one of the books published by the NFHS which obviously supports your position. However, it is possible that the author of that case play did not intend it to be used in a wider context. That author may not have envisioned what an official should do if a player in this situation were to bounce the ball between his legs to a trailing teammate.
|