Indisputable nonsense

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by TopicalTropical

I am not a Gonzaga fan at all Dude.
The replay system is a joke. Why don't you address my points instead of doing what is all so common on this board and attack.
The replay system often takes way too long. The refs are looking like camera hogs out there and the game is being trashed making it a huge chore too watch when you combine it with the fouls at end of game situations. Did you watch the end of the Marshall game? It was horrible to watch.
The refs on the floor should not be doing the replays for the tournament. What if Ohio St had come back and won the game. What if say that Charleston player had made the 3 and then there was a foul one and one and Auburn sneaked the player on. It would have been way more controversial.

Now, why don't you pick a side. I am against the current replay system and there should be changes. Are you in favor of it?

So another one of these threads were somebody's complaining about the rules and think somebody in here is going to change it?

All these threads are for is so somebody can agree with you.

What advice do you have for officials to make them better with the rules that are currently in place?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

So another one of these threads were somebody's complaining about the rules and think somebody in here is going to change it?

It is possible, maybe not probable, but possible. I've submitted rule changes, in my case, NFHS rule changes (not NCAA), up through our IAABO chain of command (I believe that this also involves our state high school interscholastic sports governing body) all the way up to the NFHS rules committee and have been successful in getting a few of my NFHS rule changes implemented.

It was while posting here on the Forum that I noted the removal of the phrase "outside the cylinder" in the definition of goaltending (only four parameters instead of five). This made it impossible, in some cases, to differentiate goaltending from basket interference (we often ridicule nonofficials that don't know the difference). I sent the rule change (back to the original definition) up the chain of command and now the definition of goaltending has gone back to five parameters.

I've also submitted successful rule change suggestions regarding the "captain's defensive match-up" when multiple substitutes come into the game, and most recently, the clarification regarding the legal colors for compression shorts (the old rule was confusing, same color as uniform shorts, or same color as "uniform" (as the rule read at the time), which could have meant jersey, or shorts?). I suggested removing the term compression shorts (they're just short tights) from the rules since tights were now legal and already had well defined color restrictions.

It's not easy to submit such changes, there's a lot of paperwork involved. One has to submit the old rule, the new rule, a rationale for the change, and also submit any changes necessary in any, and all, related rules, penalties, and casebook plays.

I hold no particular title within my local IAABO board, I'm just a lowly "journeyman" official, but I was able to get three changes into the NFHS rulebook.

So go ahead and "think somebody in here is going to change" a NFHS rule. It is possible, I can verify that.

That being said, I know more about rocket science, or brain surgery, than I know about changing NCAA rules. Maybe changing NCAA rules is harder than playing darts with spaghetti? Maybe harder than a steel reinforced concrete wrapped diamond?