Quote:
Originally Posted by RichMSN
Sorry, I'm quoting you, but the first sentence below refers to the other poster:
Read the case play again. What I said was, "If the horse collar is what brings the runner down....."
In A, he doesn't go down and in B he doesn't go down from the HC. Where are we saying anything different?
What I'm saying is that contact from a second person doesn't absolve the person with the hand in the cookie jar from a HC penalty if that's what brings the runner down.
|
Rich, for two years, our state supervisor of officials who is on the NFHS Rules Committee, has told us that contact during the tackle by a second opponent negates the horse collar. It removes the official having to make a decision as to whether the first defender brought the runner down or the second defender. I don't see anything in the case play that changes that.
Obviously from the responses here, other rules committee members are communicating the same thing to their officials.
I've got nothing.