uh oh....BLARGE!!!!

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

That one has probably caused more headaches for officials than probably any other rule. I'd love to see it disappear. But I ain't MTD Sr so I guess I just gotta live with it.

I'm also open to other rules that I can ignore.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

You stated above that a RULE can't be defended by rule. Do you know how truly idiotic in nature that statement really is?

I do not presume to speak for Mark, but for those who may not know, he is merely pointing out the conflict between rule 4-7 and case 4.19.8C. This conflict, I believe, has been recognized by many, including some who say varying degrees of "That's what you have to do because that's what the case play says," which tells me that they agree that no reasonable person could have read the rule book and come up with this case play.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I do not presume to speak for Mark, but for those who may not know, he is merely pointing out the conflict between rule 4-7 and case 4.19.8C. This conflict, I believe, has been recognized by many, including some who say varying degrees of "That's what you have to do because that's what the case play says," which tells me that they agree that no reasonable person could have read the rule book and come up with this case play.

Nope, MTD is telling us to ignore the case book play completely. There's a heckuva big difference between saying a rule is illogical and saying we should completely ignore that illogical rule and instead follow the procedure that he just made up even though that procedure goes directly against plainly written rules.

Iow there's a big difference between tilting at the windmill and saying the windmill doesn't exist. One is a philosophical discussion; the other is just plain ridiculous.

[biz]

As some of you might know, in addition to refereeing I also am a Boys JV/Assistant Varsity Coach (make all your a$$istant coach jokes here) and if I'm reading what MTD Sr. has written correctly I would have a huge problem with what he suggests. If I'm the coach who's player ends up getting penalized after the two referees "get together" after a blarge, which I'm assuming we are all considering two opposing preliminary signals (1 PC or TC and 1 Block), I'm going to be a bit peeved. Furthermore, if I'm coaching in a Varsity contest and this happens I'm telling my HC what the casebook play calls for and if the game officials decide to make up their own ruling, then we would be playing the remainder of the game under protest (our league rules allow for protests). I have a feeling that the protest hearing would not go well for the officials who decided to set aside a ruling, especially if they set it aside knowingly.

Just my $.02