[crosscountry55]

Listening to a local radio show the other day and the host's guest was a prominent local HS coach. He was talking about how he got his first T in five years the other night when he was warned for (as he described it...haven't heard the official's perspective yet) being a few steps out on the floor early in the first quarter. Coach is a little annoyed but jokingly says, "if you pay as much attention to the calls on the floor as you do to where I'm standing tonight, we'll be all right." He gets whacked. His biggest beef on the radio show was that he coaches his kids a step or two on the floor all the time, and that this is the first time in forever that any official enforced the rule so literally. He felt like the official was out to get him.

On one hand, provided the coach's account is accurate, I believe we may have had a "gottcha" referee situation, here. On the other hand, I think the T was justified because no matter how much you disapprove of an official's literalism, you can't make a snarky comment like that and expect to get away scott free.

But this is all backstory. The coach then went on to lament that the worst aspect of what happened was that he had to sit the rest of the game, making it much harder to coach, and the fact that the T happened so early in the game exacerbated the T's impact. It was like a game-long penalty rather than a spot-correction. He wants to end the seat belt rule in NFHS. Feels sitting is a prolonged humiliation that actually causes tension with the officials to fester, and that this aspect of the rule outweighs the deterrent effect that it purports to have.

And so I ask: What do you all think? Has the seat belt rule outlived its purpose? And does anyone know if the rules committee has ever pondered eliminating it before? (I'm thinking probably not considering the coach's authority to stand is still technically a state association adoption option, even though all but 2-3 states have now adopted it.)