Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee
Who gave you yours, Junior?
|
All that I can do is read what's written in the case book.
I might happen to think that what it says is silly and disagree with it. I've certainly disagreed with other case plays in the past. I might even agree that Howard's ruling or method of officiating this play is better.
However, that's not the point. What's important is that when it comes to being on the court, seeing the play happen, and having to choose between calling how Howard says or what is currently published in the NFHS book, any NFHS official has to go with what's in the book. Even if I don't like it, the NFHS has instructed us to call the game by the rules as written. (You haven't forgotten your favorite mantra, have you?
)
The fact is that my personal opinion doesn't matter, neither does Howard's, or even yours, JR. The NFHS told us that very clearly in a point of emphasis last year:
"Rules Enforcement. Officials need to be aware that personal interpretations of the rules have a negative impact on the game. The rules are written to provide a balance between offense and defense, minimize risks to participants, promote the sound tradition of the game and promote fair play. Individual philosophies and deviations from the rules as written negatively impact the basic fundamentals and tenants of the rules."
So until the NFHS changes what is in the book, Howard, yourself, Juulie, and I should all be calling it by the book, and additionally we should be advising any other officials to do the same.