In this case, the interpreter's guidance was in regard to a play that a team ran in an exhibition game during our state camp. The same team ran this play during a playoff game later in the season.
So, it was definitely NOT a "what-if" scenario.
Perhaps if the Referee, in your State camp exhibition game, had taken a more definitive stand to address this play on the first time it was run, there wouldn't be a lingering issue.Football, especially at the Interscholastic level, is often a game of judgments.
2 basic NFHS rules rarely specifically referenced share a common imperative designed to end disagreements;
9-10-5, provides, "Neither team shall commit any act which,
in the opinion of the referee, tends to make a travesty of the game" and NFHS:
1-1-6, dictates: The referee has authority to rule promptly, and in the spitit of good sportsmanship, on any situation, not specifically covered in the rules.
The referee's decisions are final in all matters pertaining to the game."
The common imperative, clearly, is the intention to designate "the referee" as the final arbiter, so as to avoid endless arguments about individual interpretations, by non-referee participants, who most often are trying to promote an irregular interpretation to suit a particular objective or agenda.
Very little interferes, as much, with a game designed for children as an interruption by differing adults pushing for revising an interpretation that might benefit an opponent. Unfortunately, there are instances where differing interpretations, explanations cannot be resolved, in which a single source is given the power to render a decision, binding to all, for the benefit, and orderly continuation, of the game.
