Michigan v. Minnesota

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by VaTerp

Well if you want to play the semantics game then sure.

But it is a POE in this year's rules book and this is the language every official in my association received from our interpreter via our commissioner:

"Any elbow in movement that contacts an opponent above the shoulders must be ruled an intentional foul, at minimum. If the elbow contact is deemed excessive, savage, or violent, the contact may be ruled flagrant. Under no circumstances may officials rule such contact a player-control foul, since a player-control foul is, by definition, a common foul."

So if a coach ask me why I called an intentional foul on his player for elbow contact I am going to say "by rule it must be an intentional foul, at minimum....."

And that is exactly why some states have interpreted "movement" to really only mean certain types of movement. This is absolutely not an intentional foul (for F1) and should not be called as one. In fact, if I had anything, it might be illegal use of nose.

[RookieDude]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

And that is exactly why some states have interpreted "movement" to really only mean certain types of movement.

As a Washingtonian I approve this message...