Court involvement.

[paulsonj72]

Originally Posted by mutantducky

I agree with the Court's decision but I do think there should be some kind of review. I would even be willing to accept protests kind of how the NBA does. Not for judgement calls or missed calls. Those are going to happen and it would be too big of a mess to sort out. But here you have an unusual play with an incorrect ruling that clearly impacted the outcome. That's unfair to the losing team. I have no problem if local associations put something in place to lessen the chance of that happening but good luck working that out!



not sure why some of you are hating on the female reporter?

Coach had a chance to argue that the rule was improperly applied during the game and failed to take advantage of the rule.

[so cal lurker]

Originally Posted by paulsonj72

Coach had a chance to argue that the rule was improperly applied during the game and failed to take advantage of the rule.

As I understand most protest procedures, they are predicated upon the team that protests specifically objecting to the rule application at the time it was made -- doesn't sound like that happened here . . .

[BillyMac]

The next time I screw the pooch on an out of bounds call, will have to hire an attorney and take a day off from my day job to make a court appearance?

[Kelvin green]

The judge was correct. As far as I recall ( for those of you that have the jokes ready yes I am an attorney) the weight of case law is clearly on the side of officials and the league. Personally, this litigation based on my understanding of basic sport law was frivilous. The only people who won in thus case was the attorney who filed at the wishes of the client. The legal system is no place to decide the outcome of the game.

Hey the officials screwed the rule. It happens but how many other mistakes were made by the two teams and the officials. Let's litigate them all...

[Scooby]

At Kevin, you are just trying to drum up business.