Hurdling

[waltjp]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I personally have a big problem with this being called if there is no contact. Personal fouls involve contact. If there is no contact all you could have is unsportsmanlike conduct, which is not considered a foul under that part of the rules.

Face guarding?

Interlocked blocking?

Helping the runner?

These are all fouls that may not include actual contact with the opponent.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by waltjp

Face guarding?

Interlocked blocking?

Helping the runner?

These are all fouls that may not include actual contact with the opponent.

Passing interference is not a personal foul.

Interlock blocking involves actually blocking and is also not a personal foul.

Helping the runner does not involve contact with the opponent. Not much different than intentional grounding does not involve any contact. Even with helping the runner involves some philosophy and a common sense approach.

Again my point was not talking about whether the rule says something or not, I do not think it is a good call without contact. I also feel I am not likely to pull that rule out of my behind. Do what you feel is best.

Peace

[iceman70]

JRutledge,

Just curious, rule 9-4-3f, "Throw a helmet to trip an opponent". If the player jumps and the helmet misses him, no flag right?

It could have been worded, "Throw a helmet AND trip an opponent".

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by iceman70

JRutledge,

Just curious, rule 9-4-3f, "Throw a helmet to trip an opponent". If the player jumps and the helmet misses him, no flag right?

It could have been worded, "Throw a helmet AND trip an opponent".

You can look for all the scenarios that you like. I stand by what I said and how I am going to call this. If you cannot tell the difference in the statement above, this is something you will have to deal with.

I do know that last year (or a couple of years ago) there was a call made in a state final where I live that someone called helping the runner and took the rulebook so literally. The call was widely questioned even thought the language could have been technically right.

Peace

[iceman70]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

You can look for all the scenarios that you like. I stand by what I said and how I am going to call this. If you cannot tell the difference in the statement above, this is something you will have to deal with.

I do know that last year (or a couple of years ago) there was a call made in a state final where I live that someone called helping the runner and took the rulebook so literally. The call was widely questioned even thought the language could have been technically right.

Peace

JRutledge,

I can tell the difference between both statements. The first one indicates that the throwing of the helmet is what makes it illegal. In the second, it is only illegal if it makes contact.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by iceman70

JRutledge,

I can tell the difference between both statements. The first one indicates that the throwing of the helmet is what makes it illegal. In the second, it is only illegal if it makes contact.

OK, find me the NF ruling that says how to apply the rule?

I am waiting.

Peace

[iceman70]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

OK, find me the NF ruling that says how to apply the rule?

I am waiting.

Peace

If a player throws his helmet at another player, who needs specific instructions from the NF? It is possible to overanalyze nearly every rule.