Why??

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee


I will be glad to tell you. Your specific quote above is "The IHSA told us to allow them and the NF rulebook says nothing about allowing insulin pumps,sweats....". That quote is as wrong as your other quotes about religious headgear not being covered either.It is obvious that there ARE rules covering these things.It is also obvious that you were not aware of those rules.

Btw,insulin pumps are covered by the first sentence of R3-5 and the 3 criteria used in casebook play 3.5SitA.

As I have stated before, the rules or mandates from the NF were not the issue in this case. I would assume that the NF wanted sweats or pants that covered the other requirements based on other rules situation. The player in question, wore gray shorts with a white and red uniform. Not in compliance to NF Rules. Or at least that is what you can assume according to the rulebook and casebook.

Also, insulin pumps are not specifically covered and the IHSA sent a message to all Licensed Officials saying that how they wanted this implemented. They did not use rule language to support their position, but did say how they wanted us to allow this.

And the point still remains, States can, will and have come up with situations that need to be addressed outside of what the NF wants. Even the NF gives officials a rule to rule on things not specifically covered in the rule. If a state wants to change something or require that certain practices are to be adopted, I do not see much the NF can do about it. That is why they make rulebooks and casebooks every year, the game is changing and the situations change to produce more and more challenges. If all these things you state were so clear, there would be no need to make it clearer to their official. Obviously most of us are not going to face these situations, but someone contacted the IHSA to get some uniformity that the NF could not or did not have in place.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by rockyroad




No you wouldn't...you would still make dumb-a** excuses for the things you screw-up on...and JR, it's still only ONE brown-pop, no matter how many times you prove him wrong...you gotta drive home afterwards, you know...

Thank you Miss Cleo for reading minds. I will be sure to give you that $8.99 a minute for your advice. And if you moved here, you would have to change, or sit in the stands. Maybe you do that already?

Peace

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by kmref
I think when J. Naismith created the game he meant for everyone to play it the same. The game itself has evolved and the rules along with it. The game is intended to be standard across the board.

So, you're a friend of Mr. Naismith's and know this for a fact? Mr. Naismith couldn't possibly known how bif this game would become.

BTW, name one sport where there's only one set of rules that govern all levels of play.

The NCAA is the next logical step for most players, coaches, and officials. Don't a majority of these strive to compete at the next level?

No, they don't. Over 95% of the kids who play high school basketball will never play college basketball. Even fewer high school officials will ever work a college game.

Imposing a standard(NCAA RULES)facilitates everyone becoming eligible to have the knowledge to perform at the next level. Athletes that travel to play teams outside of their area need to be able to play at a standard level. Officials need to call the game by the same set of standards. When officials differ, this should only be due to a difference in judgement not in rules applications, mechanics, etc.

Nah, not even close. Rules are, in most cases, are written with the age, experience, and skill level of the players who play the game. Do we want 7th graders playing by NBA rules or high school kids playing by NFL rules. No, we don't. There's a reason for these things. Don't be so narrow midned as to think eveyone must play by the same rules.

Officials need to call the game by the same set of standards. When officials differ, this should only be due to a difference in judgement not in rules applications, mechanics, etc.

I agree, based on the same set of rules. But you're never going to get everyone to play basketball or any other sport by one universal set of rules. It's not going to and it doesn't need to happen.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by JRutledge
[/B]

As I have stated before, the rules or mandates from the NF were not the issue in this case.[/B][/QUOTE]"I see that Cleopatra wasn't the only Queen of Denial"--the Church Lady.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by zebraman
Rut,

You asked me to show you where it said that in the rulebook and you'd concede the point. I did. You said the terms advantage and disadvantage weren't in the rule book. I quoted word-for-word to show you that they are. Now you're off on some other tangent and saying that those words aren't in the actual rules of the rulebook. Pathetic actually.

Z

Z, he's been doing the same stupid**** for several years. Nothing changes. He wouldn't know a rulebook if it fell outta the sky, landed on his face and started to wiggle on his nose. Corner him and he'll always refuse to answer because it will prove that's he was wrong or that he doesn't know the answer.

Does anyone remember the thread from several months back with Ruts Rules in it? Anyone have a link to that thread?

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
"I see that Cleopatra wasn't the only Queen of Denial"--the Church Lady.

JR, do you think that Geoffrey could be....hmmmm....SATAN!?

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by BktBallRef


Z, he's been doing the same stupid**** for several years. Nothing changes. He wouldn't know a rulebook if it fell outta the sky, landed on his face and started to wiggle on his nose. Corner him and he'll always refuse to answer because it will prove that's he was wrong or that he doesn't know the answer.

I got a 97 on a close book test taking the Part 2. I also received a 98 on the Part 1, before I went over it with other official. I got a 95 two years ago on the Part 2, the last time I took it. I do not have anything to prove to you or Z. That is why many of you are still doing 2 man for most of your games. But I have to prove to some fools what I know. That will be the day.

Peace

[ScottParks]

Originally posted by JRutledge

I got a 97 on a close book test taking the Part 2. I also received a 98 on the Part 1, before I went over it with other official. I got a 95 two years ago on the Part 2, the last time I took it. I do not have anything to prove to you or Z. That is why many of you are still doing 2 man for most of your games. But I have to prove to some fools what I know. That will be the day.

Peace

So the fact that you got a 97 or 98 is linked how to 3 man versus 2 man?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by JRutledge
[/B]

But I have to prove to some fools what I know. That will be the day.[/B][/QUOTE]Now we finally agree!

[rockyroad]

Originally posted by JRutledge
[BThank you Miss Cleo for reading minds. I will be sure to give you that $8.99 a minute for your advice. And if you moved here, you would have to change, or sit in the stands. Maybe you do that already?

Peace [/B]

Oh my God...is that the best you could come up with???

[RecRef]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by BktBallRef

BTW, name one sport where there's only one set of rules that govern all levels of play.

Swimming if you count as rules the requirements of how a stroke is to be performed and how a turn must take place.

[timharris]

hello,
here in virginia we are trained in federation and ncaa rules interpretation at least one of the associations im affilated with does this, we do a lot of military basketball and they use ncaa rules. i love it because one night you are doing federation and the next night you are doing ncaa, which i love, it keeps you on your feet and you stay sharp and alert.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by JRutledge
I got a 97 on a close book test taking the Part 2. I also received a 98 on the Part 1, before I went over it with other official. I got a 95 two years ago on the Part 2, the last time I took it.

What has that got to do with anything? Who cares how anyone does on a test? Scoring high on a test does not make you a good official!!! You're so fullof****!!

I do not have anything to prove to you or Z. That is why many of you are still doing 2 man for most of your games. But I have to prove to some fools what I know. That will be the day.

What has 2 man vs. 3 man got to do witth anything in this thread?

I guess since I work nothing but 3 man, I've reached the pinnacle of success! Good grief, that is so stupid.

You've already proved to us what you know, even if you never post another word.

[Mark Dexter]

Hell, if working 3-man makes you a good official, I must also be at my peak.

In my second year of officiating.

Still doing IM ball . . .

[williebfree]

...that we are all non-judgemental here.

I just re-read this thread, from start to finish, and feel like I am back in middle school. Are we at "triple dog dare ya", yet? (Don't ya just love the classic movie "A Christmas Story"?)

It appears that not everyone is checking the ego at the door....