NFHS Casebook Play Confusion.

[just another ref]

The obvious difference, whether it is or should be significant or not, is that one case involves team fouls, while the other involves player fouls.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by just another ref

The obvious difference, whether it is or should be significant or not, is that one case involves team fouls, while the other involves player fouls.

Read the definition of Double Fouls (both DPF and DTF). There is not distinction between fouls committed and charged to a Player as opposed to fouls committed and charged to a Team. The two fouls in both CBPs did not occur at the approximately the same time and yet the author of CBP 3.4.3C wants the two fouls to be considered as happening at approximately the same time even though that interpretation is not supported by rule.

MTD, Sr.

[Camron Rust]

The main question that needs to be addressed is when do administrative T's occur. It seems that they are indicating that administrative T's effectively occur as the game is about to begin, not when they decide to correct the numbers...and that they are to be treated as a double T.

[deecee]

bktball - I appreciate your flippant response. I'm just trying to figure out why, when there is an explicit ruling, what does a discussion solve?

Will any answer we come up with change anything? I doubt it, it will just create possible confusion as someone who comes on and reads the forum could misapply a rule (that of course is a bit contradictory) that has an explicit ruling based on what happens.

I'm just curios what conclusion we can come up with on this forum that would trump the ruling in the casebook to a very specific set of circumstances whether or not they are contradictory or not is besides the point.

In once case they address double T's for administrative purposes and in the other they address double T's on players.

I'm just trying to keep the facts clear whereas any possible discussion here would only lead to hypothetical solutions and conjecture as the facts here don't leave much wiggle room. Just what I gathered from reading these 2 case plays.

And to your point bktball, I agree that it would be "nice" for them to be consistent and pick one way or another. But until that happens it looks like we have pretty clear direction here, as convoluted and muddy as it may be.

[BillyMac]

I hate it when casebook plays seem to contradict an actual rule. When given a choice, I usually go with the casebook play, due to it's specificity. That being said, I see where Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. is coming from (You guys can't realize how difficult it is for me to agree, to even partially agree, with Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.), and would prefer that casebook plays always match the actual wording of the rule, as written.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

You guys can't realize how difficult it is for me to agree, to even partially agree, with Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Billy

I know you say that with a smile, .

MTD, Sr.


P.S. You didn't wish this bald old geezer Happy Birthday yesterday. You have to start reading the bottom of the Forum Home Page every morning.

[Kelvin green]

Now here is the real question?

Do other official's associations call these admin T's.... I have been in one game where we had a T ... The starting lineup was not in until the National Anthem and the opposing coach was complaining.... We had even talked to the offending team at about 8 minute left and they did not fix it then...


I know we have this rule but practically Im not sure it makes much difference

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I discovered this discrepency in the two Casebook Plays in early October and had planned to send an email to Hank Zaborniak. For those who do not know who Hank is. Hank was until the middle of October an Assistant Commissioner of the OhioHSAA. When Hank resigned his position with the OhioHSAA he had to step down as Chairman of the NFHS Basketball Rules Committee even though his term was going to end at the end of the 2012-13 school year. Therefore, I have sent an email to Peter Webb. Peter is the State Basketball Rules Interpreter for the Maine Principals' Association, as well as the State Rules Intepreter for IAABO. Petere has a long association with the NFHS Rules Committee and if there is anyone in the country that can give us the correct ruling it is he.

MTD, Sr.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

P.S. You didn't wish this bald old geezer Happy Birthday yesterday. .

And neither of you wished this old geezer Happy Birthday last Saturday. BTW - I'm an old geezer but I'm not bald......yet.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by deecee

bktball - I appreciate your flippant response. I'm just trying to figure out why, when there is an explicit ruling, what does a discussion solve?

What does any discussion on this forum solve? It's a point that a longtime member of the forum posted about. If you don't want to discuss it, then don't. But it seems that's not the case. So I guess the real question is, why are you still discussing it?

And yes, there's an explicit ruling. In fact, there are two of them and the "Comment" creates a contradiction.

[Nevadaref]

I took it as a rule change being announced with a new case play ruling.
I did not bother to check if the previous ruling was still in the book as MTD did.

I don't care which way the NFHS does it as long as it picks one.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

What does any discussion on this forum solve?

The NFHS has an administrator monitor this Forum twenty-four, seven. He's glued to his computer monitor and reads every word that we post. He forwards our complaints, and recommendations, to the NFHS editor, who carefully weighs our opinions and makes rule changes, caseplay interpretations, and Points of Emphasis, based on what is discussed here on the Forum. Of course, everybody already knows that.

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

The NFHS has an administrator monitor this Forum twenty-four, seven. He's glued to has computer monitor and reads every word that we post...

They also have insiders acting as agents to covertly identify spelling mistakes and poor English grammar in hastily composed responses...

Shhhhh! Be aware! He's lurking and reading.






Sorry