|
Simply removing the numbering exception may be akin to "throwing the baby out with the bath water." Presuming (considering no argument to the contrary) the numbering exception has been working well, is widely accepted and has not caused any major problems, why toss it?
I don't think there's any disagreement that this A-11 offense uses the language of the rule to create a situation the rule makers likely never envisioned. Loopholes are a natural and consistent by product of any rule and are created simply because the language used in creating the rule never allows for the unanticipated.
The key to effective rule making is not to create an intended cure that is worse than the problem it was intended to correct.
The issue of "The Spirit of the Rule" is like smoke, it is totally dependent on the opinion of whomever is claiming it and provides for unlimited posturing. I suspect the rules makers are thoroughly evaluating this situation and are carefully considering language that may not only close an existing loophole, but avoid different loopholes from forming.
I wouldn't presume the NFHS's main consideration is placing any revision, "in line with the NCAA and NFL codes, as much as it is in dealing with this issue as it relates to the game of football played at the High School level. The presumption that the game is better at the collegiate level and better yet at the professional level in nonsense. The talent and skill levels are better at each level, but the game itself is different and specifically tailored to suit each level it's played at.
Sometimes rules that make perfect sense for young men between 19-25 years old, or grown men between 24-40 years old just don't work as well for students between 13-18 years old, which is why we have different rules codes.
|