Running baseline after violation

[mick]

Originally posted by mgelb

Take me off the zimp list.

mgelb,
zimp is all right, but the horse was "too" dead a lot of the times.
mick

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by mick

mgelb,
zimp is all right, but the horse was "too" dead a lot of the times.
mick

Actually,Zimp was "there". Slider was "here". Different"nom de plume" for same person for different locations. No?

[mick]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Actually,Zimp was "there". Slider was "here". Different"nom de plume" for same person for different locations. No?

...similar style.

[ChuckElias]

I stuck up for mgelb a couple pages ago, and you guys haven't done anything to change my mind. You are hanging wayyyyyy too much on the meaning of the word "retain".

The way it's written, using any amount of common sense, says that if you had the privilege of running the endline, and the scoring commits a foul or violation that requires an endline throw-in, you get to keep that privilege. To say that "retain" doesn't apply to this situation is, I think, not a tenable position.

As I said, we all know what the rule means. But I honestly see the discrepency. The need to put "during the throw-in" back into the wording of the rule, so there is no possible mis-interpretation. I also agree with mgelb that there is no case play that covers this situation. Just do the correct (and easy) thing and put the phrase "during the throw-in" back into 7-5-7.

Chuck

[mick]

Originally posted by ChuckElias
The need to put "during the throw-in" back into the wording of the rule, so there is no possible mis-interpretation.

Chuck, let us not forget that there are some Ohio Schools of Thought that will assume that if the phrase is used once, and not specifically removed, then it remains. Yo?

mick

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by ChuckElias
I stuck up for mgelb a couple pages ago, and you guys haven't done anything to change my mind.

Chick

No problem,Zimp! Stick to your guns!