Fun With Elbows …

[JRutledge]

Are you having a conversation with yourself?

Peace

[BillyMac]

With apologies to the Divinyls (1990).

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Are you having a conversation with yourself?

Yes I am.

Second post was for the good of the cause (eight year old citation for those that don't go that far back).

Third post was because I spotted an error in IAABO's explanation that I hadn't spotted earlier.

Feel free to join in my conversation, it's get boring talking to myself, although I'm getting pretty good at it during this COVID lockdown. My cat's only familiar with WNBA rules and interpretations, so I don't bother discussing basketball officiating with her.

C'mon JRutledge. Here's a great chance for you to take a much deserved potshot at IAABO. It's all teed up for you.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

C'mon JRutledge. Here's a great chance for you to take a much deserved potshot at IAABO.

I do not work under IAABO, so I really do not care what their rulings might be. What I do wish is the NF would address these issues with something more than some old interpretations and putting something in a publication every no and then from NASO. Not sure why the NF cannot make this clearer?

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do wish is the NF would address these issues with something more than some old interpretations and putting something in a publication every now and then from NASO. Not sure why the NF cannot make this clearer?

Agree with 99% of your post. Not all officials belong to NASQ, so that shouldn't count.

What publication does every single high school official in the country get? A NFHS rulebbok and a NFHS casebook. Everything that rookie officials and experienced officials need to know should be in the current rulebook and current casebook (written on dead trees, or online). If points of emphasis are important, put them in the current rulebook and current casebook. If an interpretation is deleted from the casebook, the NFHS should give a reason (no longer valid due to a rule change, no longer valid due to a change in interpretation philosophy, or still valid but determined to be not needed (to save space) by the rules committee because the rule alone is sufficient for a proper interpretation).

Sure good trainers should be aware of old and odd interpretations from way back when, and teach such (assuming these are slill valid), but even trainers eventually "age out" and won't be aware of these ancient, but still valid points of emphasis and interpretations that aren't in current rulebooks and casebooks.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

If points of emphasis are important, put them in the current rulebook and current casebook.

Same thing with annual interpretations.