[Freddy]

Interesting to see the directions the thread has been taken. One direction, in particular, has been very enlightening to me and has caused me to ponder perspectives new to me. For that I thank you.

The original intent of my inquiry was this. There seem to be some officials who, while hesitant or downright neglectful in rules study, at the same time justify their lack of rules knowledge with a self-acclaimed understanding of "the spirit and intent of the rules".

What I'm trying to understand is this: can an official possibly survive on some sort of a perceived knowledge of "the spirit and intent of the rules" without actually knowing the rules themselves?

In other words, in the mind of the official which comes first is primary, knowing the rules or an awareness of the spirit and intent of the rules?

Full Disclosure: I'm inclined to think it's not an either/or but a both/and.

Any input or comment of that specific issue?

Thanx for your responses thus far.