Quote:
Originally Posted by ajmc
I've considered it appropriate to ignore some of your previous childish remarks, bisonlj, simply because I see no value in responding to you. But every now and again, taking excaption has value. Although my "field" experience as a HS football official is limited to 40+ years, in 4 States, I've elected to extend my connection to the game as an assigned "clock operator" and have endeavored to keep abreast of NFHS Rules, Case Book information, Points of Emphasis and other documentation.
Perhaps, missing something, but I honestly don't understand why, considering NFHS Rules, Case Book advice, Points of Emphasis and ANY documentation; a receiver suggested to have obtained "CLEARLY" possession of a forward pas, while airborne and "CLEARLY" maintaining that possession while touching down in the EZ with one foot, and THEN subsequently getting knocked OOB and ultimately losing possession "simultaneously with hittng the ground" would NOT be a TD.
Someone of your (self) apparent superior knowledge, vast experience and expertise should have no DIFFICULTY in explaining that to me, referencing some specific NFHS Rule reference, Case Book confirmation, Point of Emphasis or other documented conclusion.
I anxiously await your advice.
As for consistency, during those years I worked at the NCAA Division II and III level, I tried to maintain distinction between NCAA and NFHS Rules and practices.
|
I promise to be nicer this time. Sorry about that.
There are a lot of philosophies that you are probably not going to find in any official publication. You learn them by attending association meetings, clinics, and talking to other officials. When it makes sense, the philosophies used at levels above us can be applied at the HS level. This is one I think that makes a lot of sense.
Let's say this is in the middle of the field and receiver is hit immediately after his foot touches the ground causing the ball to come out. By your absolute definition this would be a catch/fumble. Those situations can be tough with a lot of gray area. The philosophy of requiring the receiver to maintain possession on an immediate hit or catching it while going to the ground helps me be more consistent from play to play and it helps create more consistency within a crew and from crew to crew.
I assume this philosophy is becoming much more common based on the other comments in this thread. That is a good thing for officiating. I've never seen an official philosophy on holding or pass interference either, but there are generally accepted philosophies on when to pass and when to call both. They may be documented through unofficial publications (i.e. Reddings guide) or association documents (i.e. mechanics books, presentations) or clinic handouts.