RefStripes.com

Football Officiating => NCAA Discussion => Topic started by: foureyedzebra on June 09, 2011, 08:26:07 AM

Title: Major editorial changes
Post by: foureyedzebra on June 09, 2011, 08:26:07 AM

Guys,

I found this on www.profootballreferee.com

According to the website:

This was prepared by Kevin Edwards, a former outstanding major college football official and a knowledgeable rules person, and provided by Rom Gilbert, also a knowledgeable rules person and all around good guy.




[attachment deleted by admin]

Title: Re: Major editorial changes
Post by: frank.malone on June 11, 2011, 04:40:49 AM

Hello, very interesting document.

Please, may I upload this file in the officials forum in Spain (http://ctafa.proboards.com/index.cgi)

I have posted only the link, but if you give me permission I will upload the pdf file too.

Thanks
Frank.

Title: Re: Major editorial changes
Post by: foureyedzebra on June 12, 2011, 10:52:52 PM

Quote from: frank.malone on June 11, 2011, 04:40:49 AM

Hello, very interesting document.

Please, may I upload this file in the officials forum in Spain (http://ctafa.proboards.com/index.cgi)

I have posted only the link, but if you give me permission I will upload the pdf file too.

Thanks
Frank.

Frank,

Check with Todd Skaggs at www.profootballreferee.com I am sure he will not object; but give him some props and post a link to his website when you post the document.

Title: Re: Major editorial changes
Post by: frank.malone on June 13, 2011, 05:15:31 PM

Thank You, I'll do.

Frank.

Title: Re: Major editorial changes
Post by: Bob M. on June 14, 2011, 04:03:10 PM

REPLY: Interesting that they took out the "precedence" statement -- that rules supercede ARs if there is a discrepancy. Is that 'a warranty' that there are--and will be--no more discrepancies?

Title: Re: Major editorial changes
Post by: Andrew McCarthy on June 16, 2011, 09:55:34 AM

Quote from: Bob M. on June 14, 2011, 04:03:10 PM

REPLY: Interesting that they took out the "precedence" statement -- that rules supercede ARs if there is a discrepancy. Is that 'a warranty' that there are--and will be--no more discrepancies?

It seems like AR 6-3-11-II and III still don't jive with the part of 6-3-11 that says Team B’s privilege for the illegal touching violation in the end zone is not canceled by an accepted penalty.