Quote:
Originally Posted by Crabby_Bob
Speaking ASA, we enforce the INT and the CO. 8.5.B note 2.
Looking for similar language or a case play for NFHS.
|
I think we had a very long discussion on this a while back. Reading the RS, it seems that could refer only to the person obstructed being involved in the interference.
Would not accepting the enforcement of the rule negate the play? And if you negate the play, how can you have interference on a play that didn't exist?