Double Foul During AP Throw-In

[RandyBrown]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

They did a poor job specifying their desires.

The case play querry and response sent to the NFHS committee member and answered by Mark Struckhoff went directly against the written rule, so obviously the committee intended to simply restore the situation to as it was at the time of the DF.

The NFHS committee may certainly have desired to restore the same circumstances as prior to the DF,

(although I concede that is the basic intent of the rule),

The bottom line is that once again we have detected an instance of the darn rule not saying what the committee wanted it to say because they didn't draft it well.

Could you please state your source for the "true" desires and intents of the Rules Committees regarding rules. My understanding is that these are expressed in only two ways: 1) the language of the rules, themselves, and 2) model rules interpretations, which I thought are what comprise the Case Book.