How do you emphasize a rule that doesn't exist?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Now if the IHSA wants to come out and give a statement or suggest we should enforce a rule that does not exist, then they better do better than the NF is doing in this case ... They clearly made and editorial mistake ... We will have rules meetings in our state and this will and can be addressed ... All of this could be solved by changing a rule in midstream and saying "We made a mistake" or "We included a POE that did not fit the rules." Problem solved.

Agree on all counts. Enforcing this "(POE) ruling", or ignoring this "(POE) ruling", should not involve unilateral decisions determined by individual officials. As I stated earlier, seeking guidance from the NFHS, probably through one's state high school organization, or one's state officials organization, is the right way to approach this. To have one individual official enforce this Point of Emphasis, thus ignoring the written rule, and to have another official ignore the Point of Emphasis, and only enforce the written rule, in the same league, in the same conference, or in the same state, is a recipe for disaster.

Coach: "Hey? Official Smith didn't do it that way Tuesday night."

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Not the first time and certainly will not be the last.

Sad, but true.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Agree on all counts. Enforcing this "(POE) ruling", or ignoring this "(POE) ruling", should not involve unilateral decisions determined by individual officials. As I stated earlier, seeking guidance from the NFHS, probably through one's state high school organization, or one's state officials organization, is the right way to approach this. To have one individual official enforce this Point of Emphasis, thus ignoring the written rule, and to have another official ignore the Point of Emphasis, and only enforce the written rule, in the same league, in the same conference, or in the same state, is a recipe for disaster.

I am only seeking guidance from the IHSA. I do not need to hear from the NF. If they NF decides they are going to give a statement, that is on them. Until then, only my state matters in this area.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Coach: "Hey? Official Smith didn't do it that way Tuesday night."

I will say the same things I said for years.

"I do not care what you did Tuesday, this is what we are doing tonight."

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

"I do not care what you did Tuesday, this is what we are doing tonight."

Sounds like the statement many of us are forced to make in regard to undershirts, headbands, wrist bands, and sleeves.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Sounds like the statement many of us are forced to make in regard to undershirts, headbands, wrist bands, and sleeves.

This has nothing to do with equipment. And you have not given a solution to the situation. Please speak about what you are going to do and not try to equate the situation as to what others should do. The NF did not check their statements and now you want officials to enforce rules that do not exist.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

"I do not care what you did Tuesday, this is what we are doing tonight."

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Sounds like the statement many of us are forced to make in regard to undershirts, headbands, wrist bands, and sleeves.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

This has nothing to do with equipment.

Both situations can exist when one official unilaterally (all by himself) decides not to do what everyone else is doing.

Your statement, "I do not care what you did Tuesday, this is what we are doing tonight", is almost exactly what I say on a Friday night when the official on Tuesday night unilaterally decides not to enforce one, or more, of the "Fashion Police" rules. Word for word, pretty much, exactly the same.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Both situations can exist when one official unilaterally (all by himself) decides not to do what everyone else is doing.

Your statement, "I do not care what you did Tuesday, this is what we are doing tonight", is almost exactly what I say on a Friday night when the official on Tuesday night unilaterally decides not to enforce one, or more, of the "Fashion Police" rules. Word for word, pretty much, exactly the same.

I am pretty confident that there are not going to be many people that disagree with my position or action as we speak right now. There are other people that read the rules too and would see a contradiction as I or anyone else would. Also, since we have rules meetings, I am sure someone will inform the state about the contradiction if I do not ask a question first. I do not know what IAABO does, but here we ask our people exactly what they want and go from there. I would also bet that my state was more strict on uniform issues in the past than most places in the state. Heck we had a situation that made national news for God's sake (Article in Referee Magazine). Did your state make national news for a uniform violation? I did not think so.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I would also bet that my state was more strict on uniform issues in the past than most places ...

And I would agree with you. Here, in my little corner of Connecticut, many officials treat uniform, and equipment, issues as open to their own interpretation on how these rules impact the "actual" game. I had a partner throw me under the bus last year when I refused entry to a substitute who was not wearing a legal color undershirt. During the pregame layup lines, this player approached my partner, unbeknownst to me, and asked if he could play with said undershirt, to which my partner replied that it would be alright. When I denied said player entry as a substitute, an awkward discussion between myself, my partner, the player, and the coach, occurred.

It sounds like you guys have your act together regarding uniform, and equipment, issues. We're not at that point, yet.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... you have not given a solution to the situation. Please speak about what you are going to do ...

I know exactly what I am going to do, but it will only apply to Connecticut (although it might have international ramifications for all IAABO members), and it will have absolutely no impact on Illinois (and a lot of other states) basketball officials.

Next month, at out local interpretation (new rules) meeting, when our local interpreter covers the Point of Emphasis in question, I will raise my hand and state that there in no rule, nor is there a penalty, to cover this situation.

He will contact our state interpreter, who will contact our international interpreter, who will contact the NFHS, and get a proper interpretation. Then the NFHS interpretation will come back down the chain so that all Connecticut officials (and possibly all IAABO officials) are all doing the same thing in regard to this situation.

I am 100% positive that I will not make a unilateral decision to ignore said NFHS Point of Emphasis, nor will I make a make a unilateral decision to enforce said Point of Emphasis.

If I am not satisfied by this process, I may submit a rule change to the NFHS in the off season (as I successfully did this past off season regarding a change in the definition of goaltending) so that there is a rule, and a penalty, in place, allowing the enforcement of this year's Point of Emphasis.