Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DC_Ref12
Thanks, Jurassic.
I dunno. According JRut's interpretation of that case play, then an intentional foul playing the ball would have to necessitate a) going to the floor AND b) going out of bounds.
I think this is one of those cases where we're reading too much into the case play.
|
I think you are reading too much into what I am saying. I did not say you had to have a player going to the floor and going out bounds. I am saying that having a signal is not going to eliminate the reality that people will still disagree with a call like this and will point to the NF rulings on this.
Also this very same play is in the Simplified and Illustrated on page 47 and shown in two pictures. Also there is no reference to being out of bounds. So the issue of being out of bounds is not at all a factor as to why I am making this point. As a matter of fact I did not remember the “out of bounds” reference on this play. But if you are calling such a foul just because there was contact with the head or neck, then that will be seen by some as a stretch. If that is the case then there are a lot of intentional fouls we do not call. A signal is not going to change that fact.
Peace