Who is writing this stuff?

[Nevadaref]

Why can't the NFHS find someone at the office who can actually read the rules to write these interpretations?

Here is yet another example of a ruling which does not follow the text of the rule:

2008-09 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretations

SITUATION 2: A team has members with No. 0 and No. 00 listed in the scorebook and it is discovered (a) with 14 minutes on the clock prior to the game, (b) with 8 minutes on the clock prior to the game or (c) after the game starts. RULING: In (a), changes can be made without penalty. In (b), if a number is changed in the scorebook, a team technical is charged. The offended team is awarded two free throws and a throw-in at the division line to begin the game. The arrow is toward the offending team. If no changes are made to the scorebook, no infraction has occurred. In (c), after the game starts, there is no infraction if only one of the team members (No. 0 or No. 00) participates. If the second team member wishes to participate, the result is an illegal number when "discovered." The penalty is a direct technical foul on the head coach for an illegal uniform. Two free throws and a division line throw-in for the offended team and loss of coaching box privileges for the offending coach. The second team member (with the illegal uniform number) may participate without further penalty and is NOT required to change his/her number. Another possibility exists after the game starts when one of the team members wants to change his/her number prior to participating. The result is a team technical foul (no loss of coaching box) for changing the scorebook. COMMENT: No team should have both No. 0 and No. 00 on its regular roster. The infraction is likely due to bringing a player up or down a level. Therefore, it is possible the team has access to other legal uniforms to replace a uniform with an illegal number. (3-4-3d; 10-1-2; 10-5-4)


Sorry, but the rule directly forbids a team from having both 0 and 00 on the squad member list. That in and of itself is illegal. The team has committed an infraction when the 10 minute mark has been reached and both of those numbers still appear on the roster, nothing further needs to happen.

From 3-4-3d: "A team member list shall not have both numbers 0 and 00."

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Why can't the NFHS find someone at the office who can actually read the rules to write these interpretations?

Here is yet another example of a ruling which does not follow the text of the rule:

2008-09 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretations

SITUATION 2: A team has members with No. 0 and No. 00 listed in the scorebook and it is discovered (a) with 14 minutes on the clock prior to the game, (b) with 8 minutes on the clock prior to the game or (c) after the game starts. RULING: In (a), changes can be made without penalty. In (b), if a number is changed in the scorebook, a team technical is charged. The offended team is awarded two free throws and a throw-in at the division line to begin the game. The arrow is toward the offending team. If no changes are made to the scorebook, no infraction has occurred. In (c), after the game starts, there is no infraction if only one of the team members (No. 0 or No. 00) participates. If the second team member wishes to participate, the result is an illegal number when "discovered." The penalty is a direct technical foul on the head coach for an illegal uniform. Two free throws and a division line throw-in for the offended team and loss of coaching box privileges for the offending coach. The second team member (with the illegal uniform number) may participate without further penalty and is NOT required to change his/her number. Another possibility exists after the game starts when one of the team members wants to change his/her number prior to participating. The result is a team technical foul (no loss of coaching box) for changing the scorebook. COMMENT: No team should have both No. 0 and No. 00 on its regular roster. The infraction is likely due to bringing a player up or down a level. Therefore, it is possible the team has access to other legal uniforms to replace a uniform with an illegal number. (3-4-3d; 10-1-2; 10-5-4)


Sorry, but the rule directly forbids a team from having both 0 and 00 on the squad member list. That in and of itself is illegal. The team has committed an infraction when the 10 minute mark has been reached and both of those numbers still appear on the roster, nothing further needs to happen.

From 3-4-3d: "A team member list shall not have both numbers 0 and 00."

But doesn't everything on this subject under rule 10 deal with having to change a number? If only one participates, why must one be changed?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

But doesn't everything on this subject under rule 10 deal with having to change a number? If only one participates, why must one be changed?

My point exactly.

Peace

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

But doesn't everything on this subject under rule 10 deal with having to change a number?

Neither number is illegal by itself, so rule 10-5-4 doesn't apply. It is the combination of the two that is prohibited.

Originally Posted by just another ref

If only one participates, why must one be changed?

Neither one has to change. The rules don't mandate that. The rule simply says that the team member list cannot contain both 0 and 00. That is the infraction here. It has nothing to do with who plays. That's the point.

This is just a poor interpretation by the NFHS.

[Adam]

So, does 3-4-3d have a penalty associated with it?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Neither number is illegal by itself, so rule 10-5-4 doesn't apply. It is the combination of the two that is prohibited.


Neither one has to change. The rules don't mandate that. The rule simply says that the team member list cannot contain both 0 and 00. That is the infraction here. It has nothing to do with who plays. That's the point.

This is just a poor interpretation by the NFHS.

So what exactly is your problem with this interpretation? It is a given that having both numbers on the same list is not allowed, but the fact that the numbers are there is not in and of itself an infraction. Perhaps the whole point of this interp is not to call a technical in this situation.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Here is the question that should be asked: Why is it illegal to have both a player with the number "0" and a player with the number "00" suit up for the same game?

At one time until the recent past a team could have a player wearing the number "0" and a player wearing the number "00" and this was legal. But when computerized statistics programs came into being the programs could not distingish between a "0" and a "00." Don't you just love technology.

So ends tonight's history lesson. Good night all.

MTD, Sr.

[OHBBREF]

Basically what it is saying is that in (C) the Referee completely blew it when he checked the book "team list" etc, and allowed both numbers to be there and now the game has started and since you approved the book, there is nothing that you can do until both players were to participate in the game.

seems pretty simple.

[closetotheedge]

and it's easy to correct. There's no reason any team needs to have either a 0 or 00. They should just outlaw them both.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by closetotheedge

There's no reason any team needs to have either a 0 or 00. They should just outlaw them both.

I almost agree. We don't allow 01, 02, 03, 04, or 05. Why do we allow 00? When computers at the table became common, and the NFHS changed the rule, not allow both 0, and 00, they should have just said, no 00, instead of this one, or the other, nonsense. Maybe give the schools a year, or two, to get rid of the jerseys with the number 00.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

States: "Three minutes before the game starts, it is discovered: (b) two Team B team members are wearing the same number. RULING: In (b), a technical foul is charged to Team B upon discovery of the identical numbers. Only one team member may wear a given number; the other must change to a number not already in use before participating. (R10-S1-A2)"

Therefore, the RULING in 2008-09 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretation SITUATION 2(b) and (c) is incorrect. The Casebook Play has been in effect since before the NFHS and NCAA adopted the either "0" or "00" but not both rule. When the NFHS and NCAA adopted the either "0" or "00" but not both rule, "0" and "00" were to be considered the same number because, as I stated in my earlier history lesson regarding reason for the rule's adoption computers could and I suppose they still cannot tell the difference between "0" and "00".

So ends tonight history lesson.

MTD, Sr.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

States: "Three minutes before the game starts, it is discovered: (b) two Team B team members are wearing the same number. RULING: In (b), a technical foul is charged to Team B upon discovery of the identical numbers. Only one team member may wear a given number; the other must change to a number not already in use before participating. (R10-S1-A2)"

Therefore, the RULING in 2008-09 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretation SITUATION 2(b) and (c) is incorrect. The Casebook Play has been in effect since before the NFHS and NCAA adopted the either "0" or "00" but not both rule. When the NFHS and NCAA adopted the either "0" or "00" but not both rule, "0" and "00" were to be considered the same number because, as I stated in my earlier history lesson regarding reason for the rule's adoption computers could and I suppose they still cannot tell the difference between "0" and "00".

So ends tonight history lesson.

MTD, Sr.

I don't quite agree. 0 and 00 may be the same mathematical number but they are "different". So, there is some wiggle room for both items to be correct.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I don't quite agree. 0 and 00 may be the same mathematical number but they are "different". So, there is some wiggle room for both items to be correct.

Camron:

In all of the rules clinics that I attended when the rule was first adopted, the reason given was that since a computer cannot tell the difference between "0" and "00" the rules committees considered them the same number just like the computer does. Either way, the RULING in the Rules Interpretations is incorrect and the Casebook Play RULING is correct.

MTD, Sr.

[Nevadaref]

I was going to comment in the OP that I believe that the 0, 00 situation on the same member list should be treated in the same manner as identical numbers even though they are not.

Of course, now that I know that MTD holds this position, I'll have to reconsider.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

It is a given that having both numbers on the same list is not allowed, but the fact that the numbers are there is not in and of itself an infraction.

What bothers me about this interpretation is precisely that I disagree with that statement. The NFHS ruling is tantamount to telling the team, "We know that you just broke one of the rules, but we aren't going to penalize you unless you also do something else." To me, that's not proper.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

So, does 3-4-3d have a penalty associated with it?

That's a solid point, Adam. Of course, there isn't a penalty listed with that rule. This leaves us in the same situation as with another rule which we have previously discussed on this forum, namely, "The official scorebook shall remain at the scorer’s table throughout the game, including all intermissions," from 2-11-11.
Since there is no specified penalty for either rule, I would invoke 2-3 and charge a team technical foul in both cases.