Skinny on FED Going to Mouth Change

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Tim C

I am confused:

When did Fed allow individual states to write their own interpretations?

My head hurts.

What prevents them from doing so? We have adaptations to FED rules in WI in all sports.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by Rich Fronheiser

What prevents them from doing so? We have adaptations to FED rules in WI in all sports.

It would seem you are confusing modifying the rules with changing an interpretation of a rule left unmodified.

Fed states that member associations may modify the rules. (There is a penalty for that, however) But, FED does not sanction states changing the interpretations of rules.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by GarthB

It would seem you are confusing modifying the rules with changing an interpretation of a rule left unmodified.

Fed states that member associations may modify the rules. (There is a penalty for that, however) But, FED does not sanction states changing the interpretations of rules.

I'm not confusing anything. I'm looking at this realistically.

[PeteBooth]

Rich I am not speaking for Garth but I think (that could be dangerous) he means the following:

In the FED rule book, there are the Mercy / Speed-up Rules

Here in NY we did not adopt the Mercy Rule or Speed-up Rules. I do not know why NY didn't adopt these rules but that's a different discussion altogether. We do have a 15 run rule in modified.

If you do adopt the Mercy Rule / Speed-up Rules, then one has to apply them the way they are outlined in both the rule /case books. In other words a particular state can not modify the rule if they adopt it.

A state does have the option of accepting certian rules or not but once a state adopts it, they cannot on their own change it.

Garth if that's not what you meant then please clarify with examples

thanks

Pete Booth

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by PeteBooth

Rich I am not speaking for Garth but I think (that could be dangerous) he means the following:

In the FED rule book, there are the Mercy / Speed-up Rules

Here in NY we did not adopt the Mercy Rule or Speed-up Rules. I do not know why NY didn't adopt these rules but that's a different discussion altogether. We do have a 15 run rule in modified.

If you do adopt the Mercy Rule / Speed-up Rules, then one has to apply them the way they are outlined in both the rule /case books. In other words a particular state can not modify the rule if they adopt it.

A state does have the option of accepting certian rules or not but once a state adopts it, they cannot on their own change it.

Garth if that's not what you meant then please clarify with examples

thanks

Pete Booth

Pete, what I meant was this: Fed, in the first paragraph on page one in all sports rulebooks allows that member states may modify the rules. For example in Washington in basketball, we have added a shot clock for women's games. In North Carolina, apparently, they have gone back to the old missed base appeal rule. That is allowed by FED. As I said, there is a price for that. Washington cannot have a representative serve on the rules committee as long as we modify the rules.

What FED had no provision for is to accept the Rules, but change the interpretation as in last year's debat over the "Gorillar Arm" move. While there was disagreement over the interp, FED had no provision for allowing any interpretation other than theirs. As another example, a state cannot decide to leave the FPSR in, but intepret it differently.

I'm sure Rich understood what I meant. He was just a bit overreaching in his initital post.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by GarthB

Pete, what I meant was this: Fed, in the first paragraph on page one in all sports rulebooks allows that member states may modify the rules. For example in Washington in basketball, we have added a shot clock for women's games. In North Carolina, apparently, they have gone back to the old missed base appeal rule. That is allowed by FED. As I said, there is a price for that. Washington cannot have a representative serve on the rules committee as long as we modify the rules.

What FED had no provision for is to accept the Rules, but change the interpretation as in last year's debat over the "Gorillar Arm" move. While there was disagreement over the interp, FED had no provision for allowing any interpretation other than theirs. As another example, a state cannot decide to leave the FPSR in, but intepret it differently.

I'm sure Rich understood what I meant. He was just a bit overreaching in his initital post.

A state could most certainly do that. What penalty would they face, other than losing it's seat on the rules committee?

It's a Federation of State HS Associations. Will the NFHS throw a state out who interprets differently? I've not heard of any such thing.

But if you wish to "win" this "academically" rather than acknowledge that a state can really do anything it wants, feel free. You "win." You and Tee can high five or whatever it is you two do all you wish.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by Rich Fronheiser

A state could most certainly do that. What penalty would they face, other than losing it's seat on the rules committee?

It's a Federation of State HS Associations. Will the NFHS throw a state out who interprets differently? I've not heard of any such thing.

But if you wish to "win" this "academically" rather than acknowledge that a state can really do anything it wants, feel free. You "win." You and Tee can high five or whatever it is you two do all you wish.

Wow. How times have changed.

As a mutual friend often advises, "words have meaning." If you don't want people to respond to the words you use, use other ones.

The question was whether or not FED permits states to alter interpretations. They do not.

Now if your position is they do so anyway, I would suggest they do not do so formally nor on purpose, as they do when they modify or add rules, but rather through a lack of understanding.

[SanDiegoSteve]

Originally Posted by GarthB

Pete, what I meant was this: Fed, in the first paragraph on page one in all sports rulebooks allows that member states may modify the rules...

...In North Carolina, apparently, they have gone back to the old missed base appeal rule. That is allowed by FED.

That would be South Carolina, just for the record.

[GarthB]

Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve

That would be South Carolina, just for the record.

South Carolina, North Carolina, I had a 50/50 chance.

[DG]

Originally Posted by GarthB

In North Carolina, apparently, they have gone back to the old missed base appeal rule.

If you mean there is no appeal and umpire calls it when he sees it this statement is not correct for NC. You must appeal a missed base in accordance with FED rules.