[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Well then okay, do as you believe best. My conscience will be clear that I have done all that I could to steer you down the proper path.

I have advised you of the rule. I have given you the NFHS description of its intent and purpose from when it was introduced. I have even given you a specific case play ruling for the given situation, which explicitly instructs the official what to call.

If you elect to handle this differently, then that's totally up to you.

You will note I never said how I would handle it. I merely said I consider it a big problem that a rule with potentially huge consequences is so broadly worded.

The definite end is when the officials leave the visual confines. That's in the rules too.

And when the officials might leave such confines is definitely not definite.

This is not a fair criticism because the NFHS rules are written to cover just single games, not multiple games in succession.

This is exactly why it is a fair criticism, because I can count on the fingers of one hand how many times I have called a single game, rather than multiple games, which are most often in succession.

The local governing authority for those games would have to make a ruling as to how to handle your scenario. Something such as when the clock starts for the pre-game warm-up for the next contest or when the new teams take the floor, etc.

Can you give an example of a local governing authority addressing a single rule which is as obscure as this one?