![]() |
|
|
|
|||
|
This is not recent change in NFHS, is it? Hasn't that always been the rule? If that is the case, it has nothing to do with software.
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum. It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow. Lonesome Dove |
|
|||
|
It began in 2000 (it was announced in 97-98, to be effective a couple of years later)
|
|
|||
|
Discounted, On Sale Until Y3K ...
I just knew that it would cause at least one problem. And to think that many laughed at me. Well, just who's laughing now? Anybody want to buy a secure, underground shelter? It comes with a six month supply of canned food. I'll throw in the can opener for free.
__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16) “I was in prison and you came to visit me.” (Matthew 25:36) |
|
|||
|
Bob,
Of course not "what"? Not allowed at all? Or, allowed, but with penalty? I recall a thread season before last where this situation was discussed and most of the discussion centered around an 2009/8/7 interpretation that not only allowed both numbers but it also allowed both player to play - with penalty, of course. Is my memory failing me or am I misunderstanding your post?
__________________
Mulk |
|
|||
|
It'll Cost You ...
Quote:
Illegal numbers being able to play at the expense of a technical foul has been around since time began (when I started officiating). Calling both 0 and 00 illegal numbers has only been around for a little more than ten years (it seems like only yesterday).
__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16) “I was in prison and you came to visit me.” (Matthew 25:36) |
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
|||
|
Quote:
I always read your posts and probably put more weight on them than anyone's. During that discussion season before last, it was your post that convinced me that the 2008/09 interp Situation 2 allowed both numbers to be on the book without penalty. And, that both could play with penalty for illegal jersey? Not illegal number but illegal jersey. Has your stance on that interp changed? Or, has that interp been changed?
__________________
Mulk |
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners. |
|
|||
|
Quote:
I found the thread - Jan. of 2013 - and below is your post: Neither (to have on the roster), or if only one plays. Illegal (if they both play).
__________________
Mulk |
|
|||
|
Quote:
You might as well ask" can a player run with the ball?" No, it's not allowed. Well, of course the player can -- but there's a penalty involved. Sorry if that wasn't clear. |
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Officials forfeit a team, then forfeit another team | JugglingReferee | Basketball | 7 | Sun Mar 20, 2011 05:40am |
| New ABA Team in Quebec - Team Name | canuckrefguy | Basketball | 17 | Tue Aug 15, 2006 11:29am |
| NCAA team vs. Fed team | Texas Aggie | Football | 3 | Fri Feb 03, 2006 10:51am |
| 2 Technicals on Team A... How many shots for Team B? | bradfordwilkins | Basketball | 8 | Sun Feb 13, 2005 10:29am |
| LL - Which team is which? | mick | Baseball | 14 | Mon Jul 08, 2002 11:53am |