Rule and case book errors
 

Has anyone seen the NFHS listing of this year's rule and case book errors (and the corrections)?

REPLY: They're usually posted on the NFHS web site, but they're not yet there.

We were given a list at our rules meeting. I would have tried to attach a pdf here but it didn't seem to work. This is sort of the Reader's Digest version.

Rules Book:
Page 67 - Rule 9-5-1i Hiding the ball is not USC it is changed back to PF.

Case Book:
Page 8 - *1.5.1F Ruling is incorrect. All tooth and mouth protectors shall be a color other than completely clear or white.

Page 24 - 3.5.11B In (a) it is clarified that the second forward pass is an illegal forward pass.

Page 25 - Table under *3.7 Change "Dead-ball foul" to "Non-player foul" in the last column of the fourth row of 3-7-3 enforcement.

Page 32 - 5.1.2B In the Ruling, change "previous" to "succeeding" spot.

Page 34 - 5.2.2A Delete the entire play.

Page 45 - 7.2.3B In the Ruling, the third sentence should be changed from "offensive pass interference" to "illegal touching."

Page 50-51 - 7.5.2N In the Ruling, remove the word "legal" from between "second" and "forward."

Page 52 - 7.5.7C In the Ruling, "Pass interference" should be changed to "Illegal touching."

Page 55 - *8.2.2B Delete

Page 61 - Situations 9.2.1G and H Change identification of G to I and H to J.

Page 71 - Illegal participation table In all play situations, the "violator" does participate in the play.

Page 86 - *10.4.5C Delete situation and ruling.

Officials Manual:
Page 72 - Diagram should have linesman underneath goal post and line judge on line of scrimmage.

Simplified and Illustrated:
Page 79 - Playpic2 should depict the ball with its back point touching the 35, not its front point.

Actually, to be anal...

Page 8 - *1.5.1F Ruling is incorrect. All tooth and mouth protectors shall be a color other than completely clear or white.

is correct, it refers to the 2005 season in witch the ruling was true, however, we are in 2006 so I get the jist.

Page 24 - 3.5.11B In (a) it is clarified that the second forward pass is an illegal forward pass.

This has nothing to do with (b), they are independent of each other, therefore the case book is correct as is. You need to read (b) as if (a) didn't exist. This is where the tests get us, you are reading to much into the case book.

Like I said, the Reader's Digest version. Here it is in full.

Page 24 - 3.5.11B As a point of clarification in (a), as a result of 2005 rules change, the second forward pass is an illegal forward pass. This clarification should assist in understanding the ruling for (a).

I did what I said to watch out for. I read to much into the clarification and thought it was saying that (b) was incorrect and to delete.