Under cutting?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

Golly gee I love all those unofficially official rulings that she saw fit not to put in the case book...

It comes down to budgets. They have so many pages to put stuff on. They put in what will fit and periodically publish interpretations and situations outside of the book. It would, in a paper version of the book, be fully impractical to put in case plays for everything that might happen. When new things become important enough to put in, they have to push some things out. That doesn't make them obsolete. If some people had their way with their insistence on having a case play for everything, the book would be bigger than Grapes of Wrath.

While the rules are the same, the HS interpretation is really the only one actually supported by rule since neither set of rules, except in this one case, require LGP at all times when there is contact. LGP, in both, only grants the privilege of movement and verticality, neither of which is relevant to the case at hand. Still, the NCAA has the right, just like the NFHS has done in other cases, to declare that situation X should be ruled in some particular way even if the rules don't actually state so....such as the NFHS team control situation.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

While the rules are the same, the HS interpretation is really the only one actually supported by rule since neither set of rules, except in this one case, require LGP at all times when there is contact.

Exactly. In the absence of a clarifying, official interpretation, the rule is king.