Its Got No Teeth ...

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

To start, it will be up to the IAABO committee formed (if it is formed) for this purpose to separate vanished, but still valid interpretations; from those vanished because they are no longer valid interpretations.

Hopefully this will be double checked by the NFHS before being "published".

Will there be errors? With, or without, the input of NFHS, of course there will errors, but these will eventually be weeded out.

Even with errors, it's still better than what we have now with the official position of the NFHS that, as long as there are no relevant rule changes, or interpretation changes, to invalidate such, old vanished interpretations are still officially considered to be valid by the NFHS.

Without a database, that leaves us with a Wild Wild West scenario, with local interpreters (trainers), or state interpreters (trainers), IAABO affiliated, or not IAABO affiliated, making individual and unilateral decisions about the validity of a vanished interpretations, deciding individually and unilaterally whether relevant rule changes, or interpretation changes, have occurred.



I do too, but it's a labor intensive endeavor. The collection of old ("previously published") interpretations is the easy part, it's the editing for continued validly that's the hard part. And don't forget, the NFHS covers about two dozen different sports.



Lindsey Atkinson, the new NFHS rules editor for basketball, stated that as long as there are no relevant rule changes, or interpretation changes, to invalidate such, old vanished interpretations are still officially considered to be valid by the NFHS.

...

If old interpretations disappear, then follow the rules and case plays as written. If they are open to interpretation, then organizations/localities need to decide how to handle the situations.

I really don't think it's that serious.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

If old interpretations disappear, then follow the rules and case plays as written.

Sounds like a rational plan.

All that's really changed is that we can no longer utilize the, "It's not in the book", argument.