|
Mon Jan 31, 2005, 05:58pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
This is interesting. In addition, it is also very hyper-technical. So it makes sense to me (as a totalnewbie) that people would just fix and move on even if we believe there is an argument for a T.
One problem though with a few posts. We are not calling a foul on "04" we are calling a foul on "4". "04" is not a legal number. Quote:
As for those saying 0 and 00 are the same, it seems the text of the rule disagrees. Note, that by the same logic 000 would be the same number. But that is not listed as a legal number. So the rule specifically provides that 0 and 00 are different numbers and are both legal, but that both may not appear on the same roster. The rule DOES NOT say they are the same number and in fact goes out of its way IMHO to say they are not the same. But all that aside, the guys saying fix it and move on seem to share the opinion of most of the refs I work with. Its like not calling the T for rosters not being in by 10 minutes. If it takes until 9 minutes for it to happen then no big deal. If someone gripes the ref says "coach we would have given you the same leniency." So for those who said "no T" was that (a) "I dont believe it is a T at all" or (b) "it is probably a T but I am not calling that just like I wouldnt T someone for being 30 seconds late with the roster or some other hyper-technical thing." And, does it matter it was a V game with playoff implications. Does that change how you handle it? I can see an argument either way for that: (a) this is varsity level, these are the best coaches, it has been all season now, there is no problem holding them to the highest standard, (b) it is a silly paperwork issue that I am not going to let decide a game of this much importance when it can be fixed with the stroke of a pen by adding a 0. Clark 
|
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Threaded Mode
