[ajmc]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Dopey? Ethics is dopey? The reason why a rule is put in place is dopey? Playing within the spirit and intent of the rules is dopey?

With all due respect, sir, it's clear to me what (actually, who) is dopey.

Take a pill RichMSN, before you blow a gasket. On the subject of "nit-picking" I guess if you want to twist everything to suit your purpose, that's your privlege. I'm not suggesting ethics is "dopey".

What I am suggesting is that fanatics (hyenas was a great discription) opposed to this modified formation, who have been unable to justify it being illegal according to the existing rules, grasping for some other reason to demonize the concept, latched on to the "Spirit of the Rules" approach in a bogus attempt to further their argument.

Changing their approach from a discussion focusing on actual compliance with existing rule(s) to one of assinine personal attacks and trying to invoke vague interpretations of broad concepts to fit their particular opinions is what I consider "dopey". DopeyEST, because the shift wasn't necessary, the argument related to actual compliance was, and is, much stronger than this drift into an esoteric attempt to cloud the issue.

I have no problem, whatsoever, with the validity and value of applying either the "Spirit of the Rules" or "Intent of the Rules" considerations to each and every judgment we make. My problem is when either term is twisted and slanted to specifically prop up some argument that is clearly NOT SUPPORTED by the actual letter of the rule in question.
You can stamp your feet, hold your breath and run around the room all day long, and the rules as currently written are still not being violated by the concept of the A-11 Offense, if properly and exactly executed.

There in, however, lies the problem. The "Achilles heel" of this offense requires absolutely precise execution simultaneously by multiple players complying with exiting rules related to formation, motion and shifting that render it, at a minimum, extremely difficult to properly execute consistently, especially at the H.S. level.

If you want to attack this offense from a "Spirit" or "Intent" of the rules perspective, I suggest insisting on rigid enforcement of those rules a far better, more defined and supportable approach.

The more important, more basic issue is simply, as officials we dont get to decide WHAT WE THINK the rules makers meant, we are limited to enforcing what they WRITE. If we ever cross the line where, individually we, as officials, get to decide what rules "really" mean, the result will be absolute chaos.

This is a question that the rules makers need to decide, and what other codes covering other levels may decide, has no bearing on what is determined to best for the NFHS code. Correcting misunderstanding on the sideline or the stands, although at times we have the opportunity to assist in correcting the problem, is NOT our responsibility.