Quote:
Originally Posted by RookieDude
How so?...
That the MORE experienced observer was "upset" that a similar play DID NOT get a similar call?
Or that the LESS experienced officials "just called the game"?
(ass-u-me ing the observer was indeed MORE experienced than the calling officials)
|
I think his point here is that the observer wanted foul called even though there was no contact at all; just because it looked similar from his vantage point as a fan. I, too, have a problem with taking it that far.
Now, if he were to question it, and then accept their answer that there was no contact; that would be ok, IMO. But to continue to claim a foul should have been called without any contact just because the play looked similar from 110 feet away; well, that's what happens when people take a valid concept too far.