Illegal offensive player and illegal defensive player...

[DaveASA/FED]

Originally Posted by youngump

It says one possible ruling and doesn't seem to constrain the results to that approach. The way I'd prefer to see it go: these are going to be enforced in the order they occurred. If the offense comes out and tells me we had an illegal defensive player and they want to repeat the play, then we're going to do that and I no longer have an illegal offensive player who hit the ball. Similar logic can be applied if the defense gets out there first.

I understand that's just one possible application but it seems the most fair to me after considering all the rules pertaining to this situation.

My question for you is: What rule are you using to justify ignoring the second legitimate request to appeal an illegal player? The whoever gets there first approach doesn't seem like a great idea, offense is already on the field giving them an unfair advantage, then the defensive coach might have to trip them so they can get there first... so it's a race which coach is quicker that's who get thier appeal considered? Doesn't seem fair and equal enforcement of the rules to me, but that's just me. Also I am not sure how you would win a protest if you have no rules to support not ruling on an illegal player when properly appealed. I know in NFHS protests are at the states discretion but still that's how I try to think through a wierd ruling, could I support this in a protest situation? Am I directly violating any rules by this ruling?