Thursday, July 31, 2014

8.3.3 If the referee is in a position where intent must be inferred but is not clear, legal intent must be presumed.

Today’s rule is a continuation of the discussion of 8.3, “Referee Discretion”

Today’s rule has one main word in it that sets it apart from simply judging an action. That word is “intent”. There are a few situations where judging intent is important. Those situations are specific and are identified in the rules by using the word “Intentional”. Most of the places where you see that word in the rules is when it comes to judging if an action warrants an expulsion. While most actions need to be “reckless or negligent” in order to be awarded and expulsion. A few penalties also add the word “Intentional” (examples of this would be 5.6.5, and 5.2.4). In those cases, if there is not a clear way of judging the intent of the skater, then legal intent must be presumed. As always, if we as officials are not completely sure, we need to defer to the skaters.

To review: If the intent of the skater needs to be looked at, as well as the action, if you cannot determine the intent, then you must presume that the intent was legal for all discussions and decisions.