Quote:
Originally posted by PatF
It appeared to me that Friex's main point was Warren's unwillingness to seek help on a possible pulled foot, but his encouragement to seek help on this pitch/throw situation.
I see the similar situation here that developed in the pulled foot thread. Yes, everyone wants to get the call correct the first time. It apparently boils down to the same key question. IF your partner has information that can help... do you go to him for help?
Two schools of thought and everyone is convinced that his alma mater is the best.
|
See, Pat, this is where Freix's BS is so insidious. I have NEVER said I was unwilling to seek help on a possible pulled foot. That was Freix's distortion of the facts. Instead I said you should seek help on a pulled foot BEFORE you make a safe/out call. There is a HUGE difference there that Freix invariably ignores in order to make his nit-picking personal points.
In this case I told a fellow official to forget about anything but the most obvious of balks and concentrate on following the pitch. As PU that should be the primary responsibility. Sure it would be good to know whether what you're looking at is either a pitch or a throw, but if the disengagement is late and you have already focused on the release point then you simply won't be able to see that.
If your partner has information that can help then YES you go to him for that help ... AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME! With some calls the "appropriate time" never comes, because of following action. Freix refuses to acknowledge that fact. That would mean acceding to his arch enemy's infamous
List of Five calls that can be changed. In this case the subsequent game action would be easily reversable, as I pointed out in my original post on the subject.
I cannot tell you how bone tired I am of defending my point of view against the continual inanities of Steve Freix. I don't bother answering his tripe any more, but I do rely on the rest of the sensible posters here to be able to sort the meat from the gristle. You see, Pat, there really are NOT "
two schools of thought" on the key point; only the one sensible approach and the Freix school of naive nonsense.
Freix's opposition to me and my opinions is intensely personal and it goes back a long way. Please, don't be fooled into thinking it has any basis in good officiating practice.
Cheers