Backcourt Question

[Jurassic Referee]

WOBW

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

WOBW

Yea, I know.

But, sometimes I think the monkees are cute.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Ok, I'm jumping in a long way from the beginning of this conversation, but I would've thought NFHS case plays are no different than court rulings in law. The actual court rulings determine the "spirit and intent" of the written law, and in a lot of cases, expand upon it. Isn't it usually the case that the law is poorly written, and the court cases give guidance on how the law is to be interpreted? How many times do attorneys cite specific cases, rather than the actual law? Isn't this the reason for the NFHS case plays - to expand and explain the intent of the rule? If the Fed. decides they want a different interpretation, they will change the case play accordingly. Therefore, I would conclude case plays take precedence over any possibly unclear wording in the rule itself.

All true, but the case law (court decisions) often go back and forth as different judges make rulings or one judge later changes his mind. My point is that the case rulings are temporary thoughts of some individuals while the text of the Constitution has only changed 27 times in the history of our country. It is more stable and when court decisions or federal statutes are made which conflict with it, those decisions and statutes get struck down.

The same is true for the NFHS committee members who may issue a case play or an official interpretation. Other people may or may not be in agreement as these rulings are subject to who sits on the NFHS rules committee at any one time. On the other hand the text of the rule book is less fleeting. Obviously the committee makes rule changes all the time and with much more frequency than the US Constitution is amended, but their rulings still needed to be based upon what is written in the rules book. If they issue something which is obviously in contradiction to the text of the rules, then logic dictates that the rule takes priority. Afterall we must enforce the rules as written!

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

WOBW

Waste Of Big Words?

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

All true, but the case law (court decisions) often go back and forth as different judges make rulings or one judge later changes his mind. My point is that the case rulings are temporary thoughts of some individuals while the text of the Constitution has only changed 27 times in the history of our country. It is more stable and when court decisions or federal statutes are made which conflict with it, those decisions and statutes get struck down.

The same is true for the NFHS committee members who may issue a case play or an official interpretation. Other people may or may not be in agreement as these rulings are subject to who sits on the NFHS rules committee at any one time. On the other hand the text of the rule book is less fleeting. Obviously the committee makes rule changes all the time and with much more frequency than the US Constitution is amended, but their rulings still needed to be based upon what is written in the rules book. If they issue something which is obviously in contradiction to the text of the rules, then logic dictates that the rule takes priority. Afterall we must enforce the rules as written!

I think we might be comparing things differently. I look at the constitution similarly to the 20 Basketball Rules Fundamentals. Those are the basics; they have not changed in a while. The rules themselves are similar to the laws Congress passes - they might have changed based upon who is in power at the time, but they still need to conform the "basics", the rule fundamentals or the constitution. The constitution isn't concerned with, for example, how many years a person should be sentenced for a crime, just as the fundamentals aren't concerned with the specifics of a penalty (OOB, FT's, number of FT's, etc.). The case plays then expand on the rules, just like court cases expand on the laws that have been passed.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

If they issue something which is obviously in contradiction to the text of the rules, then logic dictates that the rule takes priority.

I disagree. Logic dictates whichever was issued last should take priority.
You're essentially saying the case plays are meaningless.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Waste Of Big Words?

Waste Of Band Width.....

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Waste Of Band Width.....

Is that anything like a panty waste?

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Is that anything like a panty waste?

Depends on whether or not your band wears panties.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

All true, but the case law (court decisions) often go back and forth as different judges make rulings or one judge later changes his mind. My point is that the case rulings are temporary thoughts of some individuals while the text of the Constitution has only changed 27 times in the history of our country.

And nfhs rules change on average 27 time every few years. So there goes THAT theory.

For the rest of you people who live on planet earth in non-third world countries...isn't ansybody going to addres my question? Do we agree this is NOT a BC violation??

geeze...

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

For the rest of you people who live on planet earth in non-third world countries...isn't ansybody going to addres my question? Do we agree this is NOT a BC violation??

geeze...

I'll bet you a twinkie it isn't a violation.

[tjones1]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

I'll bet you a twinkie it isn't a violation.

Make it Cold Stone ice cream and you're on. Actually, I'm just looking for an excuse to go and losing a bet would work.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

After all we must enforce the rules as written!

Sez who?? Merciful Heavens, King James Inerrancy applied to the Bible is difficult enough, but applied to the NFHS rules book?!?!? God save us from ourselves...

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

Sez who?? Merciful Heavens, King James Inerrancy applied to the Bible is difficult enough, but applied to the NFHS rules book?!?!? God save us from ourselves...

Sez the NFHS, that's who!

2006-07 Points of Emphasis

5. Rules Enforcement and Proper Use of Signals. The committee has seen a movement away from the consistent application of rule enforcement and use of approved mechanics/signals.
A. Rules Enforcement. Officials need to be aware that personal interpretations of the rules have a negative impact on the game. The rules are written to provide a balance between offense and defense, minimize risks to participants, promote the sound tradition of the game and promote fair play. Individual philosophies and deviations from the rules as written negatively impact the basic fundamentals and tenants of the rules.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Individual philosophies and deviations from the rules as written negatively impact the basic fundamentals and tenants of the rules.

Before I address the philosophical question, I want to just ask, I hope the word "tenants" isn't spelled that way in the rule book. I know that generally we don't discuss spelling issues here, but that one would be pretty egregious if your quotation is correct.

Edited to add: Oh, dear, I went and looked it up, and it IS spelled incorrectly. I can't even imagine insisting on "following the rules as written" when this kind of error is what's written. Nevada, wouldn't you like to modify your stance just a little, even?