Horse-collar (NF

[InsideTheStripe]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

If the rule was so clear, why did the NF feel compelled to give an interpretation on the rule? You must did not read the previous post.

Here is the bottom line. You do not work for the National Federation. You are licensed by the IHSA. If the IHSA tells you what to do, you do it or do not work games under their umbrella anymore. And when the head clinician/rules interpreter and the sport's administrator give you a ruling that must be what they want to do. Now if you have a problem with this that is your issue you will have to deal with. I have had similar situations happen outside of football in my other sports and we do what they tell us or we "$h!t or get off the pot." I know what I am going to call; you can call what you like. It really does not matter to me.

The federation did not feel compelled to give an interpretation on the action described in the OP. In the OP we have a runner, who remains a runner throughout the action, taken down by a what was described as a HCT. The federation did give guidance, which the IHSA has publicly overruled, as to what is to be called when what would be a HCT is applied to a non-runner or when a runner becomes a non-runner between the time the runner's collar is grabbed and the non-runner is subsequently taken down.

Maybe in your infinite wisdom, you can tell me when the runner in the OP ceased to be a runner and why of the rulings published by the IHSA that deal with NON-RUNNERS would apply. The bottom line is that the IHSA has not issued a PUBLIC ruling that pertains to this situation.

I'll be more than happy call the action a PF WHEN the head clinician/rules interpreter and the sport's administrator ACTUALLY DO give me a ruling (public or otherwise) that pertains to the play. I'm NOT going to chase them around for that ruling based on message board hearsay especially when it flies in the face of the clearly written rules under which we play .