Zig Zag Help ???

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Adam

Billy is a vet, sure, but his mentioning of it here was purely a joke.

Not really a joke, just a tongue in cheek comment regarding the inability of many Forum members to realize that the "When in Rome ..." credo may not always be acceptable, but should be acceptable for a local area that neither encourages, nor discourages belt wearing, in both training, and in rating guidelines, especially when the IAABO mechanics manual doesn't even broach this subject (not sure about the NFHS mechanics manual).

"When in Rome ..." shouldn't be a universal guideline, set in stone, for all local areas, or states, to "make up" all their own rules. It probably wouldn't work if all officials in a particularly area decided to allow two extra steps in addition to the limits already set in the traveling rule. I'm sure that the basketball officiating world would go crazy criticizing that local change.

But a "When in Rome .." guideline on a belt, or no belt? Why can't some of you just let it go? I'm not saying that your local area, or state, should have the same belt, or beltless, guidelines that we use, I never have. I'm just saying that that's the way we do it here, and ponder why some of your can't accept that. I've never criticized those of you that belong to an association that allows some white on shoes, whereas we don't allow any white at all.

When in Rome ...