Quote:
|
Originally Posted by lpneck
WTF?
From my understanding, here is the order of events.
a.) Foul and ejection are called- no bad mouthing of official.
b.) Game ends. A good amount of time after the game is over, parent of ejected player (who may not have even seen the play), politely asks official for an explanation of what happened.
c.) The official, good guy that he is, gives his interpretation to the parent. (Which he is under NO obligation to do.) Part of his explanation is the foul was not flagrant, but an elbow to the face is an automatic ejection.
d.) The parent, having a friend who he knows has officiating experience, asks if that is a correct interpretation of the rule. (Which it is NOT- there is certainly a ton of reasoning to call this a flagrant foul, but if the official did not believe it was a flagrant act -which is what he said- he should not have ejected the player.)
e.) Shave-tail says he does not believe the interpretation is correct, but he is not 100% sure, so he will get on the internets, where you can find the answer to anything, because there is a message board with officials opinions that he respects.
f.) Said officials flame him for three pages for being critical of the official.
Nice.
|
Go back and read the first post again. And try comprehending it this time. Shave-tail told the father
during the game that you could only toss somebody if a punch was thrown. At that time, shave-tail didn't have a clue what the actual call was; he was just, plain and simple, second-guessing the official with no actual knowledge of what the call was. Shave-tails statement to the father
during the game was also completely wrong, by rule also.
That's why shave-tail got flamed. That's why if shave-tail was an official, shave-tail woulda been in deep doo-doo if he had been caught doing that.
Most officials are aware of that.