Are Things Changing?

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

We're halfway through the second season of the HS team control foul, and I'm still running into officials that don't understand it.

There is a big difference between an official who can do well on a test and an official who can apply the rules in the heat of battle (well, not really battle).

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Mark Dexter

Mr. Annoying Etymology Guy has to disagree. When spoken, 'your' and 'you're' are homynyms.

Where's Mr. Annoying Spelling guy when you need him?

And: I suspect that Mr. Annoying Etymology Guy knows that homonyms are not a function of etymology, nor are words homonyms only when spoken.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Where's Mr. Annoying Spelling guy when you need him?

Right here. Damn - I knew I should have looked it up; was rushing out the door, though.

And: I suspect that Mr. Annoying Etymology Guy knows that homonyms are not a function of etymology, nor are words homonyms only when spoken.

They don't necessarily have the same etymology. Once again, was looking for an impressive word as I ran out the door.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Mark Dexter

Once again, was looking for an impressive word as I ran out the door.

Try callipygian.

Cheerleaders use that to describe me when I'm officiating.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Try calipygian.

Cheerleaders use that to describe me when I'm officiating.

Apparently the refs aren't the only blind people at the game!

BTW, Mr. ASG says your word should have two 'l's.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Mark Dexter

BTW, Mr. ASG says your word should have two 'l's.

I defer to the cunning linguist.

I went back and corrected it.

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by Mark Dexter

Mr. Annoying Etymology Guy has to disagree. When spoken, 'your' and 'you're' are homynyms. They may be pronounced the same way, but they are definately different words.

In addition, once the words are written out, the difference comes into play.

But they were spoken. He only wrote them down to explain the situation. Wouldn't be the first time a coach misinterpreted something.

[truerookie]

Originally Posted by ref18

For #2, you can have situations where there's a shooting foul, but the basket is disallowed.

For example, if a player is fouled in the act, then commits a travel prior to releasing the ball, you're still going to give him the 2 shots, as he was fouled during the try, but you can't count the basket because it was scored as a direct result of a violation.

Say what?

[ChrisSportsFan]

Originally Posted by Mark Dexter

Not sure what it means for ref-coach relationships, but your refs did mess up a few rules.

In #2, the statute of limitations may or may not have run out on the correctable error procedure for counting a basket.

Also, in #3, if the sub isn't ready in 30 seconds, no timeout is charged. Rather, a technical foul is assessed directly to the head coach. (Wanted to make sure you know that so you don't try to do it when you have refs who know the rule!)

Mark, how long do YOU say the statute of limitations is for #2?

[Mark Dexter]

Originally Posted by ChrisSportsFan

Mark, how long do YOU say the statute of limitations is for #2?

Well, it's a combination of 2-10-1 b and e. Therefore, that timeout needs to be the first dead ball after the clock properly starts following the free throws. In the original situation, that may or may not be the case.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by truerookie

Say what?

What he said, Rook, what he said.

He's right.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Try callipygian.

Cheerleaders use that to describe me when I'm officiating.

Show me a cheerleader who knows the word 'callipygian', and I'll show you a pulchritudinous logophile.