Casebook 6.4.3 Situation B & Casebook 9.1.6 Situation A

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by assignmentmaker

The current language is inconsistent. They just need to fix it. I merely proposed some language which parallels other language already effectively in use - just an efficient way to think about it. Not necessarily the only way. I'm all ears to other ways.

assignmentmaker:

First, I edited my post that you quoted above, and changed the word "false" to "double." I do not know why I was refering to the word "false." But that is just poor editing on my part.

Second, the language in the rules books and casebook plays/approved rulings is clear. Repeating what I said in my first post: "Double" refers to infractions of the rules by the same team within a specified time period. The infractions must be either fouls or violations but not a mixture of both. And, "simultaneous" refers to infractions by both teams within a specified time period. The infractions must be either fouls or violations but not a mixture of both.

It is obvious that when NFHS Casebook R6.S4.A3, Situation B and NFHS 2002-03 Rules Interpretation Situation 15 were written, the word "double" was incorrectly used instead of "simultaneous." Even though the editing of these two plays was poor, the rulings are correct.

No changes need to be made in the rules, just more accurate use of the language needs to be used by all officials including the people at the NFHS when it comes to writing casebook plays.

MTD, Sr.

[assignmentmaker]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

assignmentmaker:

First, I edited my post that you quoted above, and changed the word "false" to "double." I do not know why I was refering to the word "false." But that is just poor editing on my part.

Second, the language in the rules books and casebook plays/approved rulings is clear. Repeating what I said in my first post: "Double" refers to infractions of the rules by the same team within a specified time period. The infractions must be either fouls or violations but not a mixture of both. And, "simultaneous" refers to infractions by both teams within a specified time period. The infractions must be either fouls or violations but not a mixture of both.

It is obvious that when NFHS Casebook R6.S4.A3, Situation B and NFHS 2002-03 Rules Interpretation Situation 15 were written, the word "double" was incorrectly used instead of "simultaneous." Even though the editing of these two plays was poor, the rulings are correct.

No changes need to be made in the rules, just more accurate use of the language needs to be used by all officials including the people at the NFHS when it comes to writing casebook plays.

MTD, Sr.

You say: ""Double" refers to infractions of the rules by the same team within a specified time period."

As I read it, in the current fouls language, 'double' refers to fouls charged to one pair of opponents, which fouls occur at approximately the same time. 'Simultaneous' references fouls involving two pairs of opponents, which fouls occur at approximately the same time. (While I don't think this is addressed, a 'simultaneous' foul could be comprised of two double fouls, in which case you would asses a total of 4 fouls . . .)

As I read it, the violations language does not, in fact, parallel the fouls language.

In all cases, the map is not the territory. The labels are inconsistent. Despite that, violations of the constraints on behavior intended by the rules are generally recognized by officials, and the penalties generally applied properly, a triumph of distributed intelligence.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
[/B]

Second, the language in the rules books and casebook plays/approved rulings is clear. Repeating what I said in my first post: "Double" refers to infractions of the rules by the same team within a specified time period. The infractions must be either fouls or violations but not a mixture of both. And, "simultaneous" refers to infractions by both teams within a specified time period. The infractions must be either fouls or violations but not a mixture of both.

[/B][/QUOTE]Hmmmm, my guess is "one monkey, 47 seconds" on the above.

How come the rulebook definition for a "double" foul is 2 opponents committing fouls against each other at approximately the same time? Have you ever heard of a "double" foul, Mark, where 2 players on the same team committed fouls at the same time? Do you know what a "multiple" foul is? And the rulebook definition of a "simultaneous" foul is 2 opponents committing fouls at approximately the same time but not against each other.

Riddle me all of that, Cheetah!

Lah me.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Second, the language in the rules books and casebook plays/approved rulings is clear. Repeating what I said in my first post: "Double" refers to infractions of the rules by the same team within a specified time period. The infractions must be either fouls or violations but not a mixture of both. And, "simultaneous" refers to infractions by both teams within a specified time period. The infractions must be either fouls or violations but not a mixture of both.

[/B]

Hmmmm, my guess is "one monkey, 47 seconds" on the above.

How come the rulebook definition for a "double" foul is 2 opponents committing fouls against each other at approximately the same time? Have you ever heard of a "double" foul, Mark, where 2 players on the same team committed fouls at the same time? Do you know what a "multiple" foul is? And the rulebook definition of a "simultaneous" foul is 2 opponents committing fouls at approximately the same time but not against each other.

Riddle me all of that, Cheetah!

Lah me.
[/B][/QUOTE]



JR:

You are absolutely correct. I just got home from dropping our two sons off at their swim team practice and while driving home, I was thinking about my original post and realized that I had posted a piece of garbage, and that I needed to get back online to wipe the slate clean and post something that is correct and not garbage. I will be doing that in the next 24 hours.

And JR, if you continue to refer to me as Cheetah or any other member of this forum in the same manner you may find your posts being deleted. That kind of crap has not will not be tolerated. If you want to make a scholarly response to what someone has posted or a humorus response that is acceptable, but demeaining responses are not acceptable.

MTD, Sr.

[Edited by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. on Nov 14th, 2005 at 06:11 PM]

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Hmmmm, my guess is "one monkey, 47 seconds" on the above.

How come the rulebook definition for a "double" foul is 2 opponents committing fouls against each other at approximately the same time? Have you ever heard of a "double" foul, Mark, where 2 players on the same team committed fouls at the same time? Do you know what a "multiple" foul is? And the rulebook definition of a "simultaneous" foul is 2 opponents committing fouls at approximately the same time but not against each other.

Riddle me all of that, Cheetah!

Lah me.
[/B]

JR:

You are absolutely correct. I just got home from dropping our two sons off at their swim team practice and while driving home, I was thinking about my original post and realized that I had posted a piece of garbage, and that I needed to get back online to wipe the slate clean and post something that is correct and not garbage. I will be doing that in the next 24 hours.

And JR, if you continue to refer to me as Cheetah or any other member of this forum in the same manner you may find your posts being deleted. That kind of crap has not will not be tolerated. If you want to make a scholarly response to what someone has posted or a humorus response that is acceptable, but demeaining responses are not acceptable.

MTD, Sr.

[Edited by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. on Nov 14th, 2005 at 06:11 PM] [/B][/QUOTE]

Last night on the movie channel they showed "The Wizard of Oz". A great movie, the more times I see it the more lessons in life I find. Here's one of my favorite quotes:

"Do not arouse the wrath of the great and powerful Oz!"

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Hmmmm, my guess is "one monkey, 47 seconds" on the above.

[/B]

And JR, if you continue to refer to me as Cheetah or any other member of this forum in the same manner you may find your posts being deleted. That kind of crap has not will not be tolerated.
[/B][/QUOTE]Obviously, the concept of "smileys" seems to have eluded you.

Let me see if I can help you out, Mark:


Or alternatively, put in a written complaint to someone who cares: