|
"The referee was there and he disagreed with you. That's why he threw the flag".
That's not what I understood at all. Unless I missed something, the referee threw a flag had n opportunity to reflect about it, then changed his mind.
Apparently he didn't go through the formality of waving the flag off, which would be appropriate mechanics wise, but he changed his assessment.
I realize the suggestion is "the referee said" it was because the player slipped making the contact, but considering memories are often not exactly what we choose to remember tham as, I'm going with there simply was a change in assessment.
As has been repeated, intent is not a prerequisite of something being a chop block, but it's somewhat difficult to imagine an action, that was not intended to be a chop block, somehow actually turned out to be one.
Is a player who, actually, falls into the rear of an opponent clipping him? (empasis on the word actually). Is every contact made with an opponent from the rear, below the waist a clip? I don't think so, because even though a slip and inadvertent fall into the back of an opponent can cause the same, if not more, threat and damage as a deliberate and intentional clip, it's just not the same thing and I doubt would be called under most circumstances.
Intent is not mentioned as a requirement for certain fouls being certain fould but in most instances it does enter into the decision thought process for an official deciding if the behavior is prohibited by rule.
|