Intent to hurt

[hawkk]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Sorry, this is just part of the game. The count is at 4, he needs to get rid of the ball. You HAVE to throw it at a part of the opponent where it is likely to bounce off him and out of bounds. I've been the thrower and the throwee on a lot of these, and I'd be horrified if a ref called a T, regardless of where the ball was thrown, so long as there is a legitimate game rationale for having thrown the ball at the opponent.

I guess FED casebook play 10.3.8SitB really horrifies you then,eh?It specifically mentions a throw-in at 4 seconds possibly being called a T. The "legitimate game rationale" is always left up to the official on the spot who has to make the call. I don't think that we should be second-guessing any official that called a T under these circumstances. JMHO. [/B][/QUOTE]

I was envisioning a 5 second closely guarded count, rather than a 5 second inbound -- I can see the call arising on an inbound play, particularly if aimed at the family jewels, since, as someone pointed out it's not a smart play, anyway . . . from OOB, the knees are better than the feet b/c they're harder to move out of the way . . . and my (admittedly unclear) horror was directed at a player trying to save the ball from OOB, NOT on an inbound . . . nor do I disagree that the legitimate game rationale is left up to the official -- my view is that refs should be extremely cautious in concluding ill intent on plays where there is a reason for the play other than trying to hurt the other player -- and I'd be hard pressed to ever see the call being appropriate on the save of a ball going out of bounds as there is not likely enough time to develop an ill intent