Shooter landing on defender laying on floor

[LRZ]

NFHS made it clear--until the case disappeared from the book. How much weight do you give a 15 year-old interpretation that many officials, having started after the case's disappearance, will not know about? And why was the case removed? Because it was no longer a valid interpretation? How are we to know?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by LRZ

NFHS made it clear--until the case disappeared from the book. How much weight do you give a 15 year-old interpretation that many officials, having started after the case's disappearance, will not know about? And why was the case removed? Because it was no longer a valid interpretation? How are we to know?

Philosophies and principles remain unless and until something says otherwise. If we limited how we do things and how things are called to only what is in the rule book and case book, the game would look dramatically different than it does. Cases are removed due to space limitations. When they are reversed, there is typically a case expressing the new ruling. Without that, it is still valid.

[LRZ]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Philosophies and principles remain unless and until something says otherwise. If we limited how we do things and how things are called to only what is in the rule book and case book, the game would look dramatically different than it does. Cases are removed due to space limitations. When they are reversed, there is typically a case expressing the new ruling. Without that, it is still valid.

You may be right, but I would like to see some authority for this. Is this an opinion or a fact?

In any event, even if you are correct, how would you answer the question that BillyMac always brings up: how are newer officials to know?

[CJP]

Originally Posted by LRZ

You may be right, but I would like to see some authority for this. Is this an opinion or a fact?

In any event, even if you are correct, how would you answer the question that BillyMac always brings up: how are newer officials to know?

Have you read 10.7.1 A?

[LRZ]

Yes, I have read 10.7.1A. It does not say that cases remain applicable after they disappear from case books. The authority I asked for is about the position that cases remain valid even after they are no longer in the book.

Nor does 10.7.1A say that players who have fallen are entitled to that position, as did the previous case. It may be interpreted that way, but it is in no way as clear as 10.6.1E.

You seem to be saying that 10.7.1A controls; Camron Rust seems to be saying that 10.6.1E still controls. I was responding to the latter.

[CJP]

Originally Posted by LRZ

Yes, I have read 10.7.1A. It does not say that cases remain applicable after they disappear from case books. The authority I asked for is about the position that cases remain valid even after they are no longer in the book.

Nor does 10.7.1A say that players who have fallen are entitled to that position, as did the previous case. It may be interpreted that way, but it is in no way as clear as 10.6.1E.

You seem to be saying that 10.7.1A controls; Camron Rust seems to be saying that 10.6.1E still controls. I was responding to the latter.

I think 10.7.1A covers the old 10.6.1E. It does it with much less verbiage.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Philosophies and principles remain unless and until something says otherwise. If we limited how we do things and how things are called to only what is in the rule book and case book, the game would look dramatically different than it does. Cases are removed due to space limitations. When they are reversed, there is typically a case expressing the new ruling. Without that, it is still valid.

Do you call technical foul every time a team runs out of the locker room around the opposing team?

[bucky]

Also, how should we handle cases found in case books of one level but not in another? Should we apply the case play from one level to another (presuming no real rule differences and that situations are similar)?

I have found case plays in the NCAAM case book and used them as a way to rule a situation in NFHS. (plays/rules were identical)

[CJP]

Originally Posted by bucky

Also, how should we handle cases found in case books of one level but not in another? Should we apply the case play from one level to another (presuming no real rule differences and that situations are similar)?

I have found case plays in the NCAAM case book and used them as a way to rule a situation in NFHS. (plays/rules were identical)

Start a new thread.

[CJP]

Thanks for the discussion. I am sticking with my no call. I have not seen an argument to change my mind.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Philosophies and principles remain unless and until something says otherwise. If we limited how we do things and how things are called to only what is in the rule book and case book, the game would look dramatically different than it does. Cases are removed due to space limitations. When they are reversed, there is typically a case expressing the new ruling. Without that, it is still valid.

Originally Posted by AremRed

Do you call technical foul every time a team runs out of the locker room around the opposing team?

Bump.