Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rev.Ref63
For me, the NOTE: on 10-3-7-C would be enough to back him up. In my opinion, A1 crossed the line when he was "nose-to-nose" with B1. He was not just "near him" as has been stated; he was literally in his face at all times, similar to how a drill instructor gets in the face of a new recruit. If he'd stuck his tongue out we would have had contact.
He was, IMO, trying to embarrass, ridicule, and demean, the opponent.
|
Rev,
That all sounds wonderful, but your logic sounds like something I would expect from a younger, inexperienced, lower level official that has never or rarely gets varsity or college assignments. I have no idea what your background is in officiating and what you are used to working. But you do not see any people that claim to work high levels saying your ruling makes a lot of sense. Even your rules reference has no interpretation that backs that up that way of thinking. I run a new officials class for my association and this is the kind of question that I expect to come from them. They are not used to being around the game and they are not used to enforcing rules so they ask questions that many that have experience would roll their eyes about.
I have no problem with you asking the question, but to try to justify it with a very shady interpretation is where I have the problem. I know we talk a lot about the "old boy networks" and other systems where people get assignments or lose assignments based on who you know. But I can personally tell you that more people lose opportunities because they call things that despite their good intentions are not widely accepted and lose opportunities as a result of "making stuff up" because the individual thinks they are doing the right thing. Standing next to someone is not illegal. And we should not be making calls because a player is frustrated by a legal act. That is not very good officiating in my opinion.
Peace