"Hey Ref, that's five seconds!"

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Regarding Raymond's statement about "keep(ing) up with rule changes at the NCAA level and the high school level", God bless you Raymond. To quote Rudyard Kipling, "You're a better man than I am ...", and I'm not being sarcastic, I don't believe that I could master both rules sets, certainly not NFHS and both NCAA gender rule sets.

I do not think anyone said a thing about mastering all rules sets. I think it is not hard to know that the NCAA changes rules, they have a press release. We as officials usually talk about it here. We usually post the press release and at best an official could read some of the headlines of the changes because you can almost count on the fact that you will hear about them during the season. I know when the NBA changes something or the NFL changes something, I certainly pay attention in those respective sports. But then again, when a coach starts yelling at me about a pro or college rule, I know at least that there is a minor difference. Even when I would do a girls game, you would get women's college rules thrown at you that did not apply.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do not think anyone said a thing about mastering all rules sets.

I did. I was referring to (and praising) Raymond (as well as many other Forum members), who as both a high school official, and a college official, has obviously mastered both rule sets, or he wouldn't be working many games on either level.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I did. I was referring to (and praising) Raymond (as well as many other Forum members), who as both a high school official, and a college official, has obviously mastered both rule sets, or he wouldn't be working many games on either level.

Again, you make a simple conversation into a bigger deal.

Peace

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Again, you make a simple conversation into a bigger deal.



Peace

Don’t you think that’s a little like the pot calling the kettle black?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

Don’t you think that’s a little like the pot calling the kettle black?

No. I have many conversations here in the context of the conversation. Billy often suggests something totally that was no where in the conversation. No one said a single thing about having to master all rules in this conversation. They simply said to have knowledge of other levels is a good thing and how to have that working knowledge. It is actually a common thing we do here when talking about my posted videos. I even ask questions in the videos about the level that people work and how the rule applies. I do not assume those that are talking about a play in a college game is incapable of understanding a little difference when pointed out to them in if it is not an exact high school example. Since I post most of the videos and I see people discuss differences all the time, it is clear that most people have a working knowledge of rules at other levels they do not currently work.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

No. I have many conversations here in the context of the conversation. Billy often suggests something totally that was no where in the conversation. No one said a single thing about having to master all rules in this conversation.

I said that "single thing", "master". Am I a "no one"? The ones who have to master multiple rule sets are those that officiate multiple rule sets, and I'm very much impressed that many Forum members have the ability to do such.

Why should I not be allowed to use the word master before anybody else uses it in reference to those "two rule sets guys"?

I should be able to use any word that I want to use to describe such officials, especially when I'm praising them.

Now if I'm berating Forum members, then I should be censored regarding the types of words that I use, and if I use the wrong word, I should be suspended, or worse.

But when was the last time you saw a post by my me that berated anybody? I'll give you a hint, it was about a Forum member with the initials O and S. I admit it, I lost my patience, and I lost my cool. It was very unlike me, very un-Christian of me. I can't state his Forum name because it's been mentioned twice in the past month, and I don't want to find out what happens if his name is mentioned a third time. That didn't work out very well the movie Beetlejuice.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I said that "single thing", "master". Am I a "no one"? The ones who have to master multiple rule sets are those that officiate multiple rule sets, and I'm very much impressed that many Forum members have the ability to do such.

Why should I not be allowed to use the word master before anybody else uses it in reference to those "two rule sets guys"?

I should be able to use any word that I want to use to describe such officials, especially when I'm praising them.

Now if I'm berating Forum members, then I should be censored regarding the types of words that I use, and if I use the wrong word, I should be suspended, or worse.

But when was the last time you saw a post by my me that berated anybody? I'll give you a hint, it was about a Forum member with the initials O and S. I admit it, I lost my patience, and I lost my cool. It was very unlike me, very un-Christian of me. I can't state his Forum name because it's been mentioned twice in the past month, and I don't want to find out what happens if his name is mentioned a third time. That didn't work out very well the movie Beetlejuice.

You can use whatever word you want to use, but that was not the point of what I said. And again the issue I had was not that you used the word, it was that you attributed that to those that you were discussing this with, in other words misrepresenting the conversation or point of view. Just like the "straw man" point of view that anyone accused you of berating anyone. I just took exception in the conversation (not upset in any way) to the fact you suggested that I or anyone said that you must master rules for levels you do not work. Heck, I have not mastered rules at both levels. Many times there are things that never happen and never are a concern. I just do not make big mistakes because I have seen a lot in my 20 years of officiating to know the variations in the rules and study why there are differences. The rules change so much over the years it takes time to realize the impact of certain situations like when the NCAA went to the Class A and B technical foul classifications.

Peace

[Raymond]

Also, what I have found is that college guys who kick HS rules also kick college rules.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Also, what I have found is that college guys who kick HS rules also kick college rules.

Exactly!!!! I know college guys that do not know basic rules in college and clearly try to enforce college philosophies in high school games.

Peace

[Kansas Ref]

I concur and have observed the same "kicking of rules" & "not knowing rules"; this past season one of my partners called "basket interference" after B5 in an attempt to block a shot inadvertently hit the backboard and not even causing a slight wobble--try for goal (layup) was missed. I admonished said partner at halftime. He really thought it was a goal-tending/BI to slap the bb
And another one: some of my partners will call "carrying the ball" when the A1 just inadvertently high dribbled (and ball never came to rest on palm) just an odd looking single episode of a high dribble. All fans want this to be a violation---and moan---but alas, legal dribble. I told them halftime that it's not carrying the ball and it will make us look 'bad' as a crew if I'm not calling it a violation but you are calling one. One partner agreed after I showed him the NF rule book reference that I keep in changing bag, the other partner (a 20 year vet according to him) said and I quote "if I see him dribble like that again, I''ll call it the same way".
I think we did our best in that particular game at confusing the players, coaches, and fans.