Quote:
Originally posted by Kelvin green
Have Mark go to the attic and find his brief case.
Once upon a time in a galaxy far far away...
The rule interpretation used to be that any time a player was airborne and somebody went underneath it was intentional.
That was changed and Mark I believe has pointed out the difference in plays....
|
So the point is that this is a rule that has been changed, and one association or assignor wants the old way back. Okay.
My concern is that taking away the shooter's landing spot, because you're trying to draw a charge is different from undercutting. Undercutting to me means that the defender takes the legs right out from under the shooter, so he literally cannot land on his feet. Stepping in to take the charge could mean that the opponents end up chest to chest with the shooters toes on top of the defender's toes. Not the same thing at all, but both intentional if this assignor gets his way. I'd like to see more distinction made.