View Single Post
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jun 02, 2014, 05:08pm
Adam's Avatar
Adam Adam is offline
Keeper of the HAMMER
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Originally Posted by MD Longhorn View Post
Nothing confusing about that at all.

Unfortunately - it doesn't say that in the rulebook. The wording in the rulebook is what's confusing - and contradictory to their case plays. Unless someone goes to clinics (or discusses things here), they are likely to miss this one on the court.
Exactly. And frankly, the longer the rule remains written the way it is, the more veterans are going to start making this mistake. Had an association veteran last year get into the book and thought he discovered an unintended (and unaddressed) change to the TC rules. I'm still not sure if he bought into the whole "but the NFHS has been clear" explanation. I'm not sure I would have....

Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
... especially new officials that weren't familiar with the old wording, which made for a much easier interpretation of this ruling.

New studious "bookworm" officials will be especially confused, because the interpretation doesn't seem to match the written rule.
Simplified it for you.
Sprinkles are for winners.

Last edited by Adam; Mon Jun 02, 2014 at 05:10pm. Reason: Because
Reply With Quote