Reddings guide illegal participation

[KWH]

Originally Posted by ajmc

Of course, with no way of knowing for sure, this would only be a guess, but perhaps the NFHS is just so amazed that that such an obstinant, and really silly, interpretation could emerge from the present language. Maybe they think that your interpretation is just so ridiculous, those wanting to adhere to it are just joking, and playing with them. Or they might think that a revision of the current language may not help anyone dumb enough to accept your interpretation.

I don't think there is any doubt that you clearly understand what I'm saying, and I've tried, several times, to suggest I simply cannot make any sense out of what you are suggesting is the way this rule should be interpreted. Perhaps I'm just not as smart as you and am unable to make any sense out of your interpretation.

Unless I'm missing something, the rule doesn't state, or suggest in the slightest, that once a player establishes himself as being OOB, he has to remain in contact with whatever it was that he touched (that made him OOB)to remain OOB.

As I've offered countless times, it's very clear, simple, logical and follows the concept of the game, that a player who has been inbounds, retains that status even though he may pass over a sideline or endline airborne, until he touches something, including the ground OOB, at which point he becomes OOB. That makes sense and is in line with the concept of the game.

Your argument, that after running around OOB, apparently indefinitely, a player can somehow regain his lost inbounds status by simply jumping up ito the air (while remaining outside the boundry lines) defies logical explanation.

You seem reluctant to even try and think this scenario through and appear willing to accept something you agree makes no sense, because someone conjured up this dopey interpretation. If you're comfortable with that, that's on you.

I would really appreciate you, or anyone, who buys into your interpretation explaining whatever logic you can muster up to make sense out of it. If it doesn't make any sense , at all, it can't be right.

Huh?
Alf-
Are you so anal retentive that you can't see, on this entire thread, no one supports your opinion? Is it possible you could be wrong? Or, are you so far superior to the rest of us peons that you feel we can not determine very clear, simple, logical and follows the concept of the game, that you defy.
You are, Alf, a legend in your own mind.