Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Dan_ref
Errr...say what?
Either the shooter's foot was on the line or it wasn't. It's black and white, no uncertainty. The rule is clear, either he's on or within the line or he's not.
If you come to me to ask "did you see his foot on the line?" what am I going to say? "Of course I did but I'm giving him 3 anyways". Or maybe "No I didn't, and neither did you, you lying sack of sh1t." No need to confer, just fix it and move on.
|
Err....say what?
I certainly agree with the highlighted statements.
But....where does it say that if I'm 110% sure that the shooter's foot wasn't on the line and the call was in
my primary, that you can just go ahead and over-rule me and say the foot was on the line?
If anybody ever tried to pre-game that one with me, I'd tell 'em to go find another partner. Homey don't play dat game!