Who Let The Dogs Out ???

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Then as said before we can complain how they screwed it up.

I'm not complaining. I'm not worried. I just thought that some interpreters out there might have some early insight into the implications of this rule. Other than that, I can be as patient as the next guy, as long as I'm on my medication, which is a lot stronger than Midol.

JRutledge, Jurassic Referee, and RichMSN: I can see your point, but RichMSN, you really should show at least a little interest in the implications of a rule clarification, especially since non-officials (coaches, fanboys, etc.) are known to frequent this Forum, and we don't want to give them the impression that we don't care about minor rule clarifications. We have debated, and discussed, much more minor rules, and interpretations, than this, on several occasions here on the Forum.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

JRutledge, Jurassic Referee, and RichMSN: I can see your point, but RichMSN, you really should show at least a little interest in the implications of a rule clarification, especially since non-officials (coaches, fanboys, etc.) are known to frequent this Forum, and we don't want to give them the impression that we don't care about minor rule clarifications. We have debated, and discussed, much more minor rules, and interpretations, than this, on several occasions here on the Forum.

Billy,

I do not think that Rich does not care they way you are suggesting, I think we are jumping the gun. We will not know until the rules are written. And I know I do not care what a fan or coach thinks of my thoughts on the rules a few months before the rules are clearly written. And I really do not care what they think when they do not read the rules themselves when it is made available to them. Bottom line, wait until the rules are in writing and then we can discuss the wording. But right now all we would be doing is speculating about something we have no idea will have an answer. I teach an officiating class and have an official role with the rules and mechanics so I am really interested in what the ramifications mean, but not for the reasons you stated.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

JRutledge, Jurassic Referee, and RichMSN: I can see your point, but RichMSN, you really should show at least a little interest in the implications of a rule clarification, especially since non-officials (coaches, fanboys, etc.) are known to frequent this Forum, and we don't want to give them the impression that we don't care about minor rule clarifications. We have debated, and discussed, much more minor rules, and interpretations, than this, on several occasions here on the Forum.

I dont know if you're being facetious here or not, it's hard to tell sometimes (and I think you prefer it that way). But while I'm all for debating anything and everything about which I disagree with someone, I'm not for telling someone else what they should show interest in or care about.

And as much as I've jumped in on this, in the end, it doesn't matter. Whether I ask the questions in this forum or not, someone high up will clarify before the opening tip of the hs season.

[APG]

Billy, I'm not sure how you expect us to fully debate this when we don't have the actual rules and case book plays in front of us.

And also, you can't get on Rich for giving the impression he might "give them the impression that we don't care about minor rule clarifications," when you and Mark talk about not letting games go into overtime all the time. Regulars know that you are joking but "since non-officials (coaches, fanboys, etc.) are known to frequent this Forum," we don't want to give them the impression that we care if a game goes into OT or not.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Billy, I'm not sure how you expect us to fully debate this when we don't have the actual rules and case book plays in front of us.

And also, you can't get on Rich for giving the impression he might "give them the impression that we don't care about minor rule clarifications," when you and Mark talk about not letting games go into overtime all the time. Regulars know that you are joking but "since non-officials (coaches, fanboys, etc.) are known to frequent this Forum," we don't want to give them the impression that we care if a game goes into OT or not.

"Word!!!!"

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

You and Mark talk about not letting games go into overtime all the time. Regulars know that you are joking but "since non-officials (coaches, fanboys, etc.) are known to frequent this Forum," we don't want to give them the impression that we care if a game goes into OT or not.

I love working overtime games. The more overtime periods, the better. There's nothing more exciting. I have constantly "gotten on" Mark Padgett for claiming that he doesn't like working overtime games. I really don't believe him when he makes that claim. I wish he would stop, especially if he's pulling our legs. I will occasionally joke with junior varsity officials for "letting" their game go into overtime, holding up the start of our varsity game, but it's a joke between officials, I would never joke about this with outsiders.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I love working overtime games. The more overtime periods, the better. There's nothing more exciting. I have constantly "gotten on" Mark Padgett for claiming that he doesn't like working overtime games. I really don't believe him when he makes that claim. I wish he would stop, especially if he's pulling our legs. I will occasionally joke with junior varsity officials for "letting" their game go into overtime, holding up the start of our varsity game, but it's a joke between officials, I would never joke about this with outsiders.

Personally, I would allow all subvarsity games to end in ties with no OT possible. No, I'm not kidding.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Personally, I would allow all subvarsity games to end in ties with no OT possible. No, I'm not kidding.

Werd!

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by richmsn

personally, i would allow all subvarsity games to end in ties with no ot possible. No, i'm not kidding.

+infinity!

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

I would allow all subvarsity games to end in ties with no OT possible.

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

+Infinity!

See what I mean. Is Mark Padgett a "get in, get out, get paid" type of official, doing it only for the money, or is he "yanking our chain"? Only his hairdresser knows for sure. I guess that it's part of his mystique. After all of his games, the fans, players, and coaches all ask, "Who was that masked official?".

By the way, there's nothing wrong with actually being a "get in, get out, get paid" type of official. Some officials are just in it for the money. It's a job. It's how they provide for their themselves, and their family. It pays the bills. It's just that athletic directors, coaches, players, and fans might think that if a few offcials are like that, then many officials are like that, when it's actually a much smaller percentage.