How about this one?
 

How about a B player stepping off the field to the team box when there is a
wide receiver on his side. The offensive team sees the open receiver, the
QB goes under center, and just before the ball is snapped, another B player goes back in
and intercepts the quick pass to the wideout. Do we have anything there?

Why don't you attend your state's Rules Interpretation Meeting and ask these very questions of your State Interpreter.

When he tells you the same thing that the guys on here have told you, I encourage you to debate him in what the rule actually says and means in the context of each case you present.

Get back to us when you do that. (you won't..... your head coach will not allow it)

He'll respond with "You guys are all wrong!" A convincing and telling argument if there ever was one.

The last one of those I went to the interpreter said that wing officials should never be the ones to call a sideline infraction, and that he had never seen a horse collar tackle and he had no idea why the NFHS had added the rule.

What if the B player returns from his own sideline?

3.7.3 SITUATION A: B11 mistakenly believes he is his team's 12th player and
leaves the field before the snap (a) on his opponent's sideline, or (b) on his sideline
and enters his team box. B11 then discovers his error and returns to field on
his team's side of the neutral zone before the snap. RULING: In (a) B11 has committed
illegal substitution by leaving on the opponent’s sideline. (3-7-2) In (b),
there is no foul as long as B11 remains a player. (2-32-1) If done intentionally to
gain an advantage, it is an illegal participation foul or it could be an unsportsmanlike
foul. If B11 returns to the field after the snap in either (a) or (b) and participates,
it is a live-ball foul for illegal participation. (9-5-1f; 9-6-4 a and d)

What if the moon were really made of cheese?

You saying the State Interpreters in Ohio are incompetent?

Would you argue with a guy that said the NFHS should not have added the horsecollar tackle rule?

If I argue with someone about rules, it's based on the full understanding of the rule and the situation pertaining to it, not just what I copy out of the book.

You didn't (not shocked) answer my question.

Seems to be alot of that going around.

See my 'phony" comment.

go back to the other board.