![]() |
|
|
|||
Wouldn't argue with your above statement, but that's NOT the problem. The problem, causing all the agita, is the interpretation that a player who has clearly stepped (stomped or laid down) out of bounds (OOB), on his own, can somehow revert back to NOT being OOB, by simply jumping up into the air, even though doing so while remaining outside the field of play, and therefore can legally participate in play from his airborne position, because while in the air, he's, "not touching anything".
|
|
|||
Alf-
We all clearly understand your point, and I am beyond certain however you will repeat it 7 more times! However, the play in the OP and the play in the Redding Study Guide were discussed at the NFHS Rules Interpreters Meeting in Indy on July 14th. These plays are legal as the player involved was not, by definition, out of bounds! If you need further clarification, you should contact your association and/or state rules interpreter. Nuff said!
__________________
"Knowledge is Good" - Emil Faber ![]() |
|
|||
Quote:
The rule as written, published and disseminated, does not define the satus of such a player. Until that changes, the question is open for interpretation. |
|
|||
Quote:
I was merely trying to be polite in answering, what seemed like foolish and naive questions, you insisted on asking repeatedly providing you with the benefit of the doubt as to the seriousness of your position. That was before I concluded you were more interested in spouting off, than contributing anything of value to the issue. Thankfully, living in this great land of ours we are each free to follow what we believe to be correct, including unsanctioned interpretations and opinions whether they be supported by common sense and logic or because someone else told us to, despite lacking any common sense or logic. As long as we accept all consequences for our choices, those choices are entirely ours to make. Last edited by ajmc; Thu Jul 23, 2009 at 02:09pm. |
|
|||
![]()
Alf-
The interpretation I have presented is that of the NFHS! In theory, that should be sufficient for every one of your requirements. As for your opinion that, "...we are each free to follow what we believe to be correct...As long as we accept all consequences for our choices, those choices are entirely ours to make. I say stick to your guns Alf! History has shown us that attitudes such as this have a way of greatly shortening the period of time a person with such an attitude is allowed to masquerade in an officials uniform!
__________________
"Knowledge is Good" - Emil Faber ![]() |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
Tags |
alf rides again, alf's english lesson, illegal participation, reading comprehension 101, totally stupic |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
illegal Substitution or illegal Participation | verticalStripes | Football | 11 | Fri Sep 12, 2008 10:57am |
Reddings Study Guide | JFlores | Football | 8 | Thu Sep 04, 2008 10:00am |
Illegal Participation, Illegal Touching, Nothing | BoBo | Football | 13 | Thu Nov 01, 2007 02:09pm |
Woohoo - Reddings Guide came today | HLin NC | Football | 4 | Fri Jun 01, 2007 07:11am |
Illegal Formation or Illegal participation? | wgw | Football | 9 | Mon Aug 29, 2005 09:31am |