Quote:
Originally posted by MN 3 Sport Ref
My two Cents:
A. Saw the game and the offical had to comunicate a very complicated (from a fans perspective) to a full house and millions on TV and a couple of rule incompetant announcers. Did he know this was not the correct signal to give technically I would be willing to bet a couple of game fees on it. Did he get his point across clearly absolutely!!.
B. I appreciate the fact that we recognize that this is not the correct signal to give (technically) in that situation, but to critisize this guy as a poor official, come on here. One does not get to the D1 level without having superior knowledge of rules and mechanics. More over one does not get to that level w/out being able to communicate a sitch such as this the many people who are not rules experts. I think some of us are just jealous of officials working at that level and use that to tear someone apart. I would be willing to guess that official got a congrats from the conference assignor for making and COMMUNICATING a very difficult call in a pressure situation to millions of people.
C. In summary while this is not the correct mechanic to use in FED ball or even many college sitch's. I think in this case it was 100% justified. Ithink one word used quite a lot on this board signifies what that official did in that sitch. PRESENCE
|
The problem with (A) * (B) is that there is a signal defined for this violation. It's pointing to the designated spot and sweeping the hand away from the spot.
The sad fact is that many officials really do think that it is "travelling". Whether they call it correctly (with a 3 foot box) or not, it still communicates the wrong information. Now a lot of people that saw the call will think that the thrower can't move the feet becuase that is was traveling implies. I've had coaches, players and fans repeatedly make statements to that effect. The myth will never disappear as long as officials use the wrong signal. It only gets reenforced.
[Edited by Camron Rust on Jan 21st, 2003 at 12:28 PM]