Why wouldn’t a TD simply write rules for their event that match their own value system… and then follow those rules as written?
1 Like
Because some, not all, TDs are lazy and just assume that people know what set of rules/values they are going to follow.
Every single comp I run has the sentence “Guidance will be taken from IFPAPA ruleset for decisions by the TD, the TDs decision will be final.” It may be a bit of a cop out using “guidance”, but it does mean that unless I make a major ball$ up with a decision, I’m covered.
In answer to the original question, I would only rule that the ball is over once the next players ball is served to the shooter lane and ready for them to play.
As for using a stream or video to assist in ruling, the argument was used for many years in football (or soccer as Americans insist on calling it😛) that VAR (video assistant referee) shouldn’t be used as not every match has the required cameras to implement such a system. It has now been implemented in the top league in the UK, but only in such a way that decisions are challenged if the onfield referee has “made a clear and obvious error”, and even the it only impacts certain decisions such as offside and handballs.
I say that TDs should be able to use anything that is available to assist their decision making, whether that be video playback, or players or spectators statements.
I’m seeing more and more events with lines like below (from City Champ):
*We will follow PAPA/IFPA rules strictly with a few modifications and amplifications, as follows…
Start with IFPAPA and adjust from there. I like to see that.
That said,I still feel that no single rule set will ever cover every possible situation. It’s the nature of our sport and this example is classic. As a TD, you have to be prepared to make a ruling on something you’ve never seen or heard of on a moment’s notice. Someone should write up a job description for a TD. Could be amusing.
2 Likes