Quote:
Originally Posted by BretMan
So I don't really get "there was interference on the play, but it wasn't intentional" as a good explanation of the call. What this would really have to mean would be "there was contact on the play, but it was not interference".
|
Agree. If it is INT, someone should be ruled out.
If no one is ruled out, it may have been contact, intentional or unintentional, it may have been confusing, it may or may not have been fair,
but it cannot be INT.