Quote:
Originally posted by RollTide
However, the game situation didn't present itself for this to be an appropriate time to use the intentional foul rule. Common sense should tell any competent official as much. Yes, we are to enforce the rule book when we're working a game. However, if we don't know how to use common sense (knowing the game/situation), our odds of interpreting and enforcing the rule book correctly aren't very good.
|
Are you intimating that your "common sense" is better than my "common sense"? Or that your "common sense" is better than the "common sense" of everybody and anybody that might happen to disagree with you on this call? You're certainly saying that your "common sense" is better than the "common sense" of the official who was right on the spot and made the intentional foul call in the game.
Are you also intimating that I'm not a "competent official" if I don't happen to agree with your "common sense"?
Your
opinion on this call didn't come down from the mount. It's your
opinion only, not gospel. I'm giving you my opinion as to how this play
maybe should be called. What's kinda bothering me is someone saying that the official above was completely wrong when that someone never saw the call, and the rules also say that an "intentional" foul may have been the appropriate call. I don't like second-guessing my fellow officials in cases like this. That's just me though. You do what you have to do.
Btw, the odds of an official interpreting and enforcing the rules correctly are much greater when an official actually knows the rules in the first place- i.e. when the ball becomes live on a throw-in.
