Question re: Jurisdiction

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Juulie Downs

We get to use our best judgment. Since this rule is aimed at sportsmanship and expressions of disgust or hostility, I think it's perfectly reasonable, and not even remotely pussilanimous to judge that the kid is just in a hurry to get to his job, or is simply trying to avoid the locker room problems, or doesn't know that there's a problem, and is just getting on with his life. None of those situations have anything to do with sportsmanship, and the game is over, and everyone is moving on with their lives. Why throw the bus into reverse, strip the gears, run over a couple or twenty fans, and ruin the entire evening for everyone, if the so-called problem (unsportsmanlike behavior) doesn't even exist?

Very well put. In Nevada's defense, (can't believe I said that) the main problem is still the wording of the rule. The posted interp is virtually identical to the OP.

It is written black and white.

He removes his jersey. A technical foul is awarded.

I personally am not gonna say, "I didn't see it." etc. I'm just gonna say, "I'm not calling that because it doesn't make sense." If that gets me in trouble, I'll deal with it.

On the other hand, if an official does make this call, when everyone involved learn the rule, which I feel safe in saying most of them don't know, I don't see how they could put much blame on that official for making the call.
(but they would anyway)