![]() |
|
|
|||
I'm convinced the only reason Billy responses several times in a row is to get higher on the posting list. There cannot be that much overthinking about none issues by anyone that has a semblance of a life. Every rule does not need that much dissertation with people that do not make "nar" rule.
Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble." ----------------------------------------------------------- Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010) |
|
||||
Intellectual Curiosity ...
Quote:
There are different level of rules expertise among those of us that seriously study the rules. For some rules experts rules expertise means to understand rules in such a way as to get them through 99% of situations one may encounter in "real game" situations. This level of study, along with mechanics study, signals study, experience, game management "people" skills, physical ability, understanding of the game, etc., will lead to a very successful basketball officiating career, maybe becoming one of the best basketball officials in an area, possibly becoming a local, or state, interpreter/trainer/clinician, etc. And then there are those, like myself, who wish to kick up their rules expertise a notch, maybe to a level of intellectual curiosity others may not desire. We attempt to understand rules at a level that exceeds 99% of situations one may find occurring in "real game" situations, odd situations that test one's rules knowledge on a "written exam" level. Why do we do it? I can't speak for all, but for me it's not to be a better "real game" official, it's not to be a better trainer, and it's not to show off. It's the intellectual challenge of "deep diving" into the rulebook and casebook to try to find answers that may not be readily apparent at first glance, especially regarding odd situations unintentionally left unclear by the NFHS. And as an added extra bonus, during a "deep dive" one may occasionally come across an "Easter egg" situation, or interpretation, that may actually be useful in a "real game". Some "research" requires multiple posts, to clarify something by peeling away additional layers of the onion, or to try to clarify something with new wording. Thanks to Forum members Zoochy, Nevadaref, bob jenkins, Camron Rust, and Mike Goodwin, there are a few great insights regarding the "sausage making" process of correcting errors in this thread. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Have we achieved absolute closure to all the situations described in this thread? No we haven't because the NFHS needs more clarity in some if its rules and interpretations. But for those of us who want to kick our rule expertise up a notch, it was a great discussion.
__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16) “I was in prison and you came to visit me.” (Matthew 25:36) Last edited by BillyMac; Mon Jul 12, 2021 at 10:33am. |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Shot clock error- correctable error? | mutantducky | Basketball | 11 | Mon Mar 16, 2015 11:35am |
Correctable Error? | Adam | Basketball | 11 | Tue Dec 13, 2011 05:48pm |
Correctable Error | Chess Ref | Basketball | 14 | Mon Dec 18, 2006 01:17pm |
Another correctable error in NIT | Nevadaref | Basketball | 2 | Tue Mar 23, 2004 05:01pm |
correctable error | coldbears | Basketball | 60 | Fri Mar 19, 2004 01:37pm |