Disconcerting ?

[JRutledge]

Again this is not hard and if the rules committee wants everyone on the bench to be apart of a violation, then why not put that in your rules and interpretations. And yes it is "mess" when we hear one thing from IAABO and people act as it applies to everyone. It does not and honestly, I do not care what IAABO does because there is no such stronghold where I live. If the NF puts something out there, that is another thing as they are what most of us can reference.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... it is "mess" when we hear one thing from IAABO and people act as it applies to everyone. It does not ...

Of course it doesn't.

Not me. I don't act like that. When there has (rarely) been some type of rule interpretation difference between IAABO and the NFHS (i.e., boxing out free throw shooter), I have always identified the interpretation as an only IAABO interpretation that only works with IAABO officials.

When I bring up questions and/or answers from the IAABO Refresher Exam (or any other IAABO source), I clearly identify the exam (or any other IAABO source) as an IAABO Refresher Exam and the questions and/or answers as IAABO questions and/or answers.

And I honestly do not recall any other Forum IAABO members acting in this holier-than-thou manner either.

Same thing for IAABO mechanics. I clearly identify them as IAABO only mechanics, and often title my posts "For IAABO Eyes Only". Some Forum members don't heed my warning. Curiosity killed the cat.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... if the rules committee wants everyone on the bench to be apart of a violation, then why not put that in your rules and interpretations ...

Agree 100%.

In a perfect world, looking through rose colored glasses, the NFHS would always be perfect and would never do anything stupid (backcourt team control on throwin exception; points of emphasis never making it into the rulebook or casebook (swinging elbows contact); changing jump ball to alternating possession forgetting about many jump ball rules that are still needed with designated jumpers).

Don't hold your breath waiting.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... if the rules committee wants everyone on the bench to be apart of a violation, then why not put that in your rules and interpretations.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Agree 100%. Don't hold your breath waiting.

Some Forum member should be able to contact a NFHS Grand Poobah who can help us out.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Agree 100%.

In a perfect world, looking through rose colored glasses, the NFHS would always be perfect and would never do anything stupid (backcourt team control on throwin exception; points of emphasis never making it into the rulebook or casebook (swinging elbows contact); changing jump ball to alternating possession forgetting about many jump ball rules that are still needed with designated jumpers).

Don't hold your breath waiting.

I already told you what my state people told us what to do. That is the only stance I will look for unless the NF wants to address this. Not many I know are trying to call a violation on the bench. IJS.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I already told you what my state people told us what to do. That is the only stance I will look for unless the NF wants to address this. Not many I know are trying to call a violation on the bench.

I have never espoused any philosophy other than "When in Rome ...".

We do things here in Connecticut that aren't 100% kosher by either NFHS or IAABO International standards.