View Single Post
  #27 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 06, 2010, 03:15pm
JRutledge JRutledge is offline
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,528
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbcrowder View Post
Despite the fact that there's actually a rule already telling us how to administer an illegal helmet contact penalty, and the actions don't fit the definition of RTP. Don't concern yourself that your ruling is wrong even if it affects the outcome of the game.

Seems you defer a lot of the strange un-rulebook-supported interpretations of yours on your local rules interpretor. I wonder if it's the messenger misunderstanding all of these rules, or if it's your interpretor. But SOMETHING is off there.
Mdcrowder,

For the record I am not just your average official. I am a state final official that happens to have 3 clinicians on our crew. That means that they not only interpret rules but have access to those that can decide what we do is official. My Referee has been a clinician in our state since the program started and happened to be the Official of the Year this past year in football. So if he asked our head guy what to do and he said that is what we do, I would rather do that than listen to some guy on this website on how to call something or not to call something.

I am also a three sport official. I happen to be a clinician in one of those sports. Worked a State Final in one of those other sports as well and one of the things is to be told how things are going to be handled while you are at the Finals. I have learned long time ago because of my association with the IHSA that if we want a ruling we go to our people. I had a friend that is a clinician in football just this year had an issue with a NF publication and asked for clarification. When he contacted the NF they told them to call your local interpreters and they would not give him an interpretation at all. Not the first time that has happen in either of my sports over the years as that is the common wisdom if you know people that have actually sat on the committee and what they tell us. And it is not unusual for my state or other states to take a stance on an issue even when the situation is in the Casebook or online with the NF. There is always a conflict with a rule and it needs clarification. Which is why my state took a stance on the horse-collar rule when the interpretations from the NF caused more confusion. Then the NF basically corrected the rule to what we were doing last year for this season, except for the specific foul language. We were still going to call a foul, just not a horse-collar if the runner did not have the ball anymore. And it came up several times over the years and everyone I know got the same interpretation.

And you live in Texas. Texas is not a NF state and does not have anyone that sits on the board or attends those meetings. So I guess maybe you would not know these things now would you? The rules are created by the NF but they will not give personal interpretations to anyone. This is why they ask you to contact your local people who have attended the NF meeting or decides this is how we will handle any number of situations. We do it often and as a clinician in my sport this is how we give out information. Again, do what works where you live, where we live this is RTP and we have asked for that clarification and were given such clarification. Maybe if you knew the right people you might figure out how the system actually works.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote