Where was it published that they are?

Again, if it's not in the current publications, then ambiguous rules are subject to local interpretations as long as those local interpretations don't contradict the rule or case book.

That's a reality of life that your proclamations will not change.

It Was a Very Good Year ...
 

Or the NFHS put out an interpretation (caseplay or annual) for this play in 2015, and has stated that old interpretations are still officially valid if there haven't been any relevant rule changes, or interpretation changes, to invalidate such, and there haven't been in this situation.

Announced ...
 

I said announced, not published.

I'm in a brick locker room with no Wi-Fi access having a pre-game with 2 newer officials, so I'm not saying something stupid like that.

So my answer to a coach who just had his AC look up a rule or my commissioner or my rules interpreter is that "BillyMac on Officiating.com told us that Ms. Atkinson said, errr ummm, I mean announced..."

Is that how things are done in Your Little Corner?

And a coach would say to me, "Who and who???"

Peace

Pants On Fire ...
 

Valid point. Don't believe me, or don't believe Camron Rust, if you don't want to, but that doesn't mean that it wasn't announced.

I have never spoken face to face with any NFHS basketball rules editor, but I tend to believe what other reliable sources tell me was announced.

Maybe we're both conspiring to yank everybody's chain and bust everybody's balls. Just one big practical joke.

Maybe somebody will soon post that I'm a liar.

Why would I do that? Is that my modus operandi on the Forum?

What Do I Have To Gain ???
 

Another valid point, but why would I, or Camron Rust, post false information?

Missing the point. Just simply saying it needs to be somewhere we can verify it came from the NF or we will be flying blind on that interpretation. Remember you said a certain interpretation applied and it did not to most of us. It is not about believing anyone, it is what we can verify to those we are discussing the issue locally.

Peace

So my commissioner or an upset coach is supposed to take the words of anonymous internet personalities that a ruling is or isn't correct? I'm supposed to draft an official response to an AD and reference this website as the authority that guides our interpretations?

Do you realize that 99% of HS officials have no idea what this site is? What would make this a more valid reference point than any of the multiple Facebook officiating groups that are out there? What would make any non-sanctioned NFHS social media site a valid reference point?

I guess this where me working my entire adult life for the military (I'm 57) separates my reality from Billy's.

Where I work and have worked since January of 1983, we don't get to say "well, Sgt. Billy said it's a regulation". We actually have to produce official documentation to back our position or to tell someone THEY HAVE TO do something. "Show it to me in the reg" has teeth, "I used to work with a Colonel who said..." means nothing.

Be Prepared ...
 

Another good point.

Look guys, I'm not saying the anybody here has to jump the gun. All I'm saying is that it's coming down the pike. Might even take a full year to show up in written form.

At this point we all know that the NFHS has never announced that annual interpretations and vanished caseplays have a statute of limitations.

Also, the idea that old vanished interpretations (with no relevant rule changes or interpretation changes to invalidate such) are still valid has never been published by the NFHS, and has never been made known to any of you by any source more reliable than Camron Rust or BillyMac.

Don't believe me? Fine. Don't believe Camron Rust? Fine.

Why would we lie, or mislead? Why would our sources mislead us?

Don't put any of this into action this year. I get it. I would do the same and not put something like this into action before checking with my local interpreter.

https://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.F...=0&w=215&h=173

I do not know what the NF has said. Don't care. I do know there have been rules changes and information in the casebook that clarified a situation of that new rule based on the change (BC Violations for example). Don't care what has a statute of limitations, but would like to know if something has changed. You said that the elbow situation was standing and there was never a rule stating that was even valid in any rulebook. It was a POE that addressed a very specific situation and then was never spoken of again by the body that put out that interpretation. Just saying, we go by publishing literature, not innuendo and people from several states away (which both you and Cameron are to me). No one knows who you are, so referencing you does not help me here. And I live in the relative backyard of the NF.

Peace

Coming Down The Pike ...
 

Good point. All I'm saying it that it's coming, no need to act on it until it's "published" in some manner.

I got it from somebody who spoke directly, face to face, to Lindsey Atkinson. Somebody who announced it to over two hundred IAABO members, many whom are interpreters, who will take this announcement back to their local boards. Second hand (not third or fourth) knowledge from somebody who is much respected in the IAABO organization, and somebody I trust.

You don't know me. You don't know him. Neither of us has done anything to personally earn your trust. Maybe I still beat my wife? Maybe I still cheat on my taxes?

So go ahead and verify before you act on it. I would do the same.

But it is coming down the pike (unless there is a detour). That's the entire point of this thread, and the only point of this thread. It's not a call to action. Never was.

Does it really sound so implausible to not possibly be true?

You cannot miss the point any bigger than this....
 

I am not saying whether it is true, I am saying how are they going to get the specifics to all officials that use NF Rules?

Peace