5-2-4a

[Patrick E.]

Rule 5-2-4a should cite "10-4-2 EXCEPTION" (not 10-2-4 EXCEPTION since such an exception doesn't exist).  10-4-2 EXCEPTION is correctly cited in 5-2-2a(3).

[HLinNC]

Typo, most likely.

They've got waaaaay bigger fish to fry in Rule 10

[Patrick E.]

Typo, most likely.

They've got waaaaay bigger fish to fry in Rule 10

Same typo in 2022 rules book.

[NVFOA_Ump]

Same typo in 2022 rules book.

Usually takes more than 1 year to fix these kind of things. 

[CalhounLJ]

Usually takes more than 1 year to fix these kind of things. 

Which blows my mind. They try to make a fundamental change in a month or two, screw it up, and then it takes years to fix it. The process is flawed. Major rules changes should take years or at least a year to implement. Write it up, send it out, let actual officials read it and apply it,offer suggestions, correct what may be wrong, and then implement.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ncwingman]

Which blows my mind. They try to make a fundamental change in a month or two, screw it up, and then it takes years to fix it. The process is flawed. Major rules changes should take years or at least a year to implement. Write it up, send it out, let actual officials read it and apply it,offer suggestions, correct what may be wrong, and then implement.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is what amazes me about the whole process in general, assuming I'm reading Ralph's posts correctly. They show up at the meeting, somebody proposes the concept of a rule change, and it gets voted in or not. They don't vote on the *actual wording of the rule*. They only write the rule once the concept has been voted on and passed and there's no check and balance in the process to prevent.... well.... *gestures vaguely*.

At some point, I think we need to just burn down the current rule book and rebuild it from scratch. It's so full of these weird hacked together kludges and loose remnants of old rules that it's impenetrable to a lot of outsiders. I think somebody had that idea with the 10-4 change, but failed miserably because they were limited in time and scope of what they could actually change.

[AlUpstateNY]

T
At some point, I think we need to just burn down the current rule book and rebuild it from scratch.

"Burn down the current rule book and rebuild it from scratch", is a tad excessive and unnecessary.  Presuming the Rule Makers meant well, revising 10-4,  the result seems to have missed the mark and will likely cause far more confusion than intended.  A better idea, might simply be; "Upon further review, the 2023 Rule 10-4 adjustments require further discussion, consideration  and implementation will be delayed and refined and included to the 2024 Rule review process". 

Mr. Lombardi advised, "Perfection is NOT attainable, but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence", which at times can be very elusive.

[bama_stripes]

So...we’re to enforce penalties by “what we mean” rather than the published “what the book says.”  That’s fine, until someone on a coaching staff who’s really savvy says “That’s not how the rule reads.”  This leads to a loss of confidence in our rulings, and a lot of unnecessary arguments.

There’s a simple fix: When adopting an NCAA rule, use the NCAA language.  It’s already been vetted and tweaked over several seasons.  Why try to reinvent the wheel?

[HLinNC]

Why try to reinvent the wheel?

For those of us who have worked in gov't, the answer is easy.  Agencies must justify their existence.

[bama_stripes]

For those of us who have worked in gov't, the answer is easy.  Agencies must justify their existence.

I understand that, but there will always be a need for a NFHS Rules Committee.  I’m more concerned with the problems that always seem to arise when they unnecessarily change language just to “be different.”

[AlUpstateNY]

So...we’re to enforce penalties by “what we mean” rather than the published “what the book says.”  That’s fine, until someone on a coaching staff who’s really savvy says “That’s not how the rule reads.”  This leads to a loss of confidence in our rulings, and a lot of unnecessary arguments.

There’s a simple fix: When adopting an NCAA rule, use the NCAA language.  It’s already been vetted and tweaked over several seasons.  Why try to reinvent the wheel?

What is the "NCAA language" for this type situation?

[CalhounLJ]

What is the "NCAA language" for this type situation?

“End of the last run”


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[HLinNC]

but there will always be a need for a NFHS Rules Committee.

Fine, but there is no need for them to reinvent the wheel every time the coaches come calling for rules to be changed so they can identify with what they've watched on TV on Saturday.
Review the request, ascertain if the NCAA rule matches philosophically with the NFHS mission; insure that it will continue to insure the safety of high school age kids, then have a specialized editorial group review it nationwide over a year's time to work on it fitting in the rulebook.

 Cramming a complete rewrite in from February to May is asinine.

[bossman72]

What is the "NCAA language" for this type situation?

They have "all but one", but they call it "3 and 1" enforcement.

SECTION 2. Enforcement Procedures
Enforcement Spots

ARTICLE 1. a. For many fouls, the enforcement spot is specified in the
statement of the penalty. When the enforcement spot is not specified in the
statement of the penalty, the enforcement spot is determined by the Three-and-
One Principle (Rules 2-33 and 10-2-2-c)

b. Possible enforcement spots are: the previous spot, the spot of the foul, the
succeeding spot, the spot where the run ends, and—for scrimmage kicks
only—the postscrimmage kick spot.


Determining the Enforcement Spot and the Basic Spot
ARTICLE 2. a. Dead-ball fouls. The enforcement spot for a foul committed
when the ball is dead is the succeeding spot.

b. Fouls by the offensive team behind the neutral zone. For the following
fouls committed by the offensive team behind the neutral zone, the penalty
is enforced at the previous spot: illegal use of hands, holding, illegal block
and personal fouls (Exception: If the foul occurs in Team A’s end zone the
penalty is a safety.). However, see Rule 6-3-13 for offensive team fouls
during scrimmage kick plays.

c. The Three-and-One Principle (Rule 2-33) is as follows:
1. When the team in possession commits a foul behind the basic spot, the
penalty is enforced at the spot of the foul.
2. When the team in possession commits a foul beyond the basic spot,
the penalty is enforced at the basic spot.
3. When the team not in possession commits a foul either behind or
beyond the basic spot, the penalty is enforced at the basic spot.

d. The following are basic spots for the various categories of plays:
    1. Running plays.    
        (a) Previous spot, when the related run ends behind the neutral zone.
        (b) End of the related run, when the related run ends beyond the neutral zone.
        (c) End of the related run, on running plays that have no neutral zone.
    2. Running plays when the run ends in the end zone after change of team possession (not on a try).
        (a) Succeeding spot, when a foul occurs after a change of team possession in the end zone and the result of the play is a touchback.
        (b) Goal line, when a foul occurs after a change of team possession in the field of play and the related run ends in the end zone. (Exception: Rule 8-5-1-Exceptions.)
        (c) Goal line, when a foul occurs after a change of team possession in the end zone, the related run ends in the end zone, and the result of the play is not a touchback.
    3. Pass plays.
        (a) Previous spot, on legal forward pass plays.
    4. Kick plays.
        (a) Previous spot, on legal kick plays unless the foul is governed by postscrimmage kick rules.
        (b) Postscrimmage kick spot, if the foul is governed by postscrimmage kick rules.

e. For Team B fouls during a legal forward pass play:
    1. Penalty enforcement for Team B for personal fouls is at the end of the last run when it ends beyond the neutral zone and there is no change of team possession during the down. (Rule 7-3-12) (A. R. 7-3-12-I and 9-1-2-III)