Officials' Authorthy (2.6)

[BillyMac]

Here's how NFHS rules handle officials' authorthy:

2-3 The referee shall make decisions on any points not specifically covered in the rules.

2-6 No official has the authority to set aside or question decisions made by the other official(s) within the limits of their respective outlined duties.

Here are some situations from the NFHS casebook:

2.6 SITUATION A: The umpire observes traveling, stepping out of bounds or another violation by A1. At approximately the same time, A1 tries for a field goal or the referee observes contact by B1 on A1. RULING: The officials must decide definitely which act occurred first. There is no rules coverage to administer the acts as occurring simultaneously. If the violation occurred first, the ball became dead. If the ball was in flight during the try before the touching of the boundary, there was no violation. If the contact occurred after a violation was observed, it is not a foul unless the contact is intentional or flagrant.

2.6 SITUATION B: A violation and personal contact occur at about the same time. Both are observed by the same official, or the violation is observed by one official and the contact by the other. What is the proper procedure? RULING: The officials shall decide which occurred first. If the violation was first, it caused the ball to become dead; hence, the contact which followed was not a foul unless intentional or flagrant. If the contact occurred first, it caused the ball to become dead and no violation occurred.

[ILMalti]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

2-3 The referee shall make decisions on any points not specifically covered in the rules.
.

So is this what makes judgement calls (as has been discussed in a number of other threads this past week ) and the "intent" an extension of the rule book ?

Side thought : Written rules transverse games; decision/judgment calls are unique to one game,

I think I am slowly getting a better understanding of comments in previous threads.

Thank you

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by ILMalti

So is this what makes judgement calls (as has been discussed in a number of other threads this past week ) and the "intent" an extension of the rule book ?

No. It's the specific part of the rules book titled "The Intent and Purpose of the Rules."

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

No. It's the specific part of the rules book titled "The Intent and Purpose of the Rules."

THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE (NFHS) RULES

The restrictions which the rules place upon the players are intended to create a balance of play; to provide equal opportunity between the offense and the defense; to provide equal opportunity between the small player and tall player; to provide reasonable safety and protection; to create an atmosphere of sporting behavior and fair play; and to emphasize cleverness and skill without unduly limiting freedom of action of individual or team play on either offense or defense.

Therefore, it is important to know the intent and purpose of a rule so that it may be intelligently applied in each play situation. A player or a team should not be permitted an advantage which is not intended by a rule. Neither should play be permitted to develop which may lead to placing a player at a disadvantage not intended by a rule.

It is the policy of the NFHS Basketball Rules Committee that there be no deviation from the rules unless experimental approval has been granted by the NFHS liaison to the rules committee.

[Coach Bill]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE (NFHS) RULES

The restrictions which the rules place upon the players are intended to create a balance of play; to provide equal opportunity between the offense and the defense; to provide equal opportunity [B]between the small player and tall player[/B]; to provide reasonable safety and protection; to create an atmosphere of sporting behavior and fair play; and to emphasize cleverness and skill without unduly limiting freedom of action of individual or team play on either offense or defense.

Therefore, it is important to know the intent and purpose of a rule so that it may be intelligently applied in each play situation. A player or a team should not be permitted an advantage which is not intended by a rule. Neither should play be permitted to develop which may lead to placing a player at a disadvantage not intended by a rule.

It is the policy of the NFHS Basketball Rules Committee that there be no deviation from the rules unless experimental approval has been granted by the NFHS liaison to the rules committee.

Provide equal opportunity between the small and tall player. What does that mean? Take away the advantages a tall player has over a shorter player? For example, allow to the small player to push in the back on rebounds he wouldn't normally get because he's small? I don't get why this is in the rulebook. Does anyone have an example?

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

Provide equal opportunity between the small and tall player. What does that mean? Take away the advantages a tall player has over a shorter player? For example, allow to the small player to push in the back on rebounds he wouldn't normally get because he's small? I don't get why this is in the rulebook. Does anyone have an example?

5'2" player goes to the rack, takes a bit of body & misses the layup... TWEET shoot 2

6'7" player goes to the rack, takes a bit of body, but plays through it & makes the layup... play on NOT an And 1.

Similar contact, bigger player can play through, but the smaller player cannot. Equal opportunity...
It is up to the officials to determine who can play through what & who cannot.

[Coach Bill]

Originally Posted by Ch1town

5'2" player goes to the rack, takes a bit of body & misses the layup... TWEET shoot 2

6'7" player goes to the rack, takes a bit of body, but plays through it & makes the layup... play on NOT an And 1.

Similar contact, bigger player can play through, but the smaller player cannot. Equal opportunity...
It is up to the officials to determine who can play through what & who cannot.

Don't understand the example. That's strength and has nothing to do with height. The 6'7" guy was strong enough to finish, despite contact. Basketball is not an equal-opportunity game. The taller players have an advantage. But, there's a specific rule, to try to minimize that advantage? That doesn't make any sense. And, I'd also like to hear other examples from officials that gave an advantage to a small guy for some reason.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

Provide equal opportunity between the small and tall player. What does that mean? Take away the advantages a tall player has over a shorter player? For example, allow to the small player to push in the back on rebounds he wouldn't normally get because he's small? I don't get why this is in the rulebook. Does anyone have an example?

It could mean the NFHS doesn't want tall players unfairly penalized.