Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 794392)

At last count, I noticed 21 such apps for the iPad. There's also some available for the iPhone as well.

Why even create such apps if they are not legal for use?

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 794392)

Why even create such apps if they are not legal for use?

Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 794381)

10-2-3: A team may not:

Use television monitoring or replay equipment or computers (other
than for statistics) for coaching purposes during the game or any intermission or
use a megaphone or any mechanical sounding device or any electronic
transmission device at courtside for coaching purposes, or electronic equipment
for voice communication with players.

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 794403)

One might say that it is also illegal for a coach to have a cell phone on their hip as it may be used for coaching purposes as well.

Concerning the apps, it's true that they can be used during practice.

For statistical purposes, I am used to seeing the computers located behind the table.

Originally Posted by grunewar (Post 794396)

They are not legal to use during the game - practices and coaching at other times, not during the game, are fine.

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 794403)

One might say that it is also illegal for a coach to have a cell phone on their hip as it may be used for coaching purposes as well.

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett (Post 794545)

Right. The coach is going to call his center on his cell during play to give him instructions. Yeah - that'll happen.

Or maybe he'll call Billy Packer for some advice. :eek:

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett (Post 794545)

Right. The coach is going to call his center on his cell during play to give him instructions. Yeah - that'll happen.

Or maybe he'll call Billy Packer for some advice. :eek:

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 794392)

At last count, I noticed 21 such apps for the iPad. There's also some available for the iPhone as well.

Why even create such apps if they are not legal for use?

Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 794547)

He could (not legally) be in contact with another coach who is observing from the top row. THat's the kind of thing FED is trying to avoid.

Originally Posted by BktBallRef (Post 794615)

I would think that with ever improving technology, the Fed is going to have make some adjustments with regards to portable computers.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 794619)

Their goal is to keep schools from feeling pressure to invest in technology.

Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 794631)

Yeah. Like shot clocks.

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 794735)

I think the reality is they are trying to avoid constant mistakes that you see on many levels in college with the shot clock. I do not see that as a technology issue rather than an application issue.

Peace

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 794742)

It is not a technology issue or an application issue, it is $$$$ issue.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 794742)

It is not a technology issue or an application issue, it is $$$$ issue.

Originally Posted by grunewar (Post 794745)

This is what I've heard too.

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 794747)

I do not think the two things have to be mutually exclusive.

Peace

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 794735)

I think the reality is they are trying to avoid constant mistakes that you see on many levels in college with the shot clock. I do not see that as a technology issue rather than an application issue.

Peace

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 794742)

It is not a technology issue or an application issue, it is $$$$ issue.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 794748)

I think it's a combination of three things:

1) $$$$
2) Timing errors / training
3) Since (most) schools can't recruit, if they feel the best chance to win is to slow the game down, they should be allowed to do so. "Entertainment" is not the issue it is in NCAA / pro.

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 794743)

Probably, but if they allowed the shot clock to be used, and they could still allow it to be used by state adoption, there would be numerous situations of misapplication and at this time no replay to correct those mistakes as we possibly have at the college levels.

Peace

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 794743)

Probably, but if they allowed the shot clock to be used, and they could still allow it to be used by state adoption, there would be numerous situations of misapplication and at this time no replay to correct those mistakes as we possibly have at the college levels.

Peace

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 794755)

Agree completely. Definitely would be a competency issue, for tables and officials. I know 90% of the HS officials in my area would screw it up regularly.

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 794759)

Concerning competency of table operations, if the guidelines in Appendix 4 of the Officials Manual would be followed, there would be less chance of errors happening.

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 794761)

Most HS table personnel don't know there is even such thing as an Official's Manual.

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 794759)

Concerning competency of table operations, if the guidelines in Appendix 4 of the Officials Manual would be followed, there would be less chance of errors happening.

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 794767)

Very true, also more than likely most table personnel do not know about the rule book.

I've noticed over the past couple of years, that I'm the only table personnel that has reference materials present at the table.

One of the recommendations is that the table personnel read http://www.nfhs.org/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=5180 "Instructions to & duties of scorer & timer for basketball games", yet how many actually do read it?

Concerning shot clock operations, there are similar documents available. However the best way to learn is by doing.

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 794768)

If they are screwing the shot clock up in college ball (mostly lower level college I am talking bout), you really think some snot nosed kid is going to get this right at the HS level? And there are a lot of directives or literature to make sure those rules are followed and they are often not followed by many that run that clock. I think HS would be a nightmare.

Peace

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 794770)

As the above states, "snot-nosed" kids do not belong at the table.

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 794770)

Concerning shot clock operation, those times I'm doing it, I feel like a bobble head, but that is because I am continually watching the ball. I only average about 2 requested resets a season due to missing something that I should not have. I realize I make mistakes, and I am willing to learn from those mistakes.

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 794770)

Shot clock is not that hard to do, just have to pay attention to the game closely and where the ball is (table wise).

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 794781)

Again you fail to listen to what people say here.

Not everyone uses that book or even knows it exists. The only people that consistently know it exists are officials that would get the book sent to them through their association or state organization. In my state, we do not even belong to the NF from an officiating point of view so what that book says means nothing to me or us in this state. We have Terms and Conditions that our state must follow and this has nothing to do with the NF and their standards. And things like when officials are to come onto the court and what is expected from game management. Also I am not talking about just varsity games, I am talking about those Saturday Morning games where the JV is playing or some Freshman B game is going on and often the people that run table are high school kids that often are paying more attention to their cell phone and texting than the game or what we are asking them to record. And that is the way it is as we do not tell them who can or who cannot work their table from a hiring point of view. And even if we get some adult, they are often not affiliated directly with the school, but are parents and they often are more worried about little Johnny or little Suzie is doing on the court than paying attention to us. Even with the best pre-games we often get the "Well I have been doing this for XX years and I know what I am doing." But the first situation comes up because they were not paying attention nor had no idea what things they were to keep track of. So please stop telling us what that stupid book says when I bet most states that even use that manual probably never distribute that to their schools for this kinds of duties and instructions.



And that is two more times than should be requested. Imagine some kid that wants to text his girlfriend or reading emails on their Smartphone than knowing when the clock starts properly.



It is hard enough that you admitted you had to reset the clock 2 a game and where I know every college game we have at least one clock issue and it involves the shot clock as well. And I learned long time ago how to pay attention to the game clock and how it relates to the shot clock and we still have problems. Sorry, I think HS needs to stay away from this, at least where I live. Too many schools and too many problems now, I do not want to add to that by using something that if incorrect could affect possessions to a team. Not even teams hold the ball and this is not much of an issue anyway.

Peace

Originally Posted by RichMSN (Post 794783)

To be fair, he said twice a season. To me, that's a pretty damned good job. Running a shot clock isn't easy.

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 794781)

Again you fail to listen to what people say here.

Not everyone uses that book or even knows it exists. The only people that consistently know it exists are officials that would get the book sent to them through their association or state organization. In my state, we do not even belong to the NF from an officiating point of view so what that book says means nothing to me or us in this state. We have Terms and Conditions that our state must follow and this has nothing to do with the NF and their standards. And things like when officials are to come onto the court and what is expected from game management. Also I am not talking about just varsity games, I am talking about those Saturday Morning games where the JV is playing or some Freshman B game is going on and often the people that run table are high school kids that often are paying more attention to their cell phone and texting than the game or what we are asking them to record. And that is the way it is as we do not tell them who can or who cannot work their table from a hiring point of view. And even if we get some adult, they are often not affiliated directly with the school, but are parents and they often are more worried about little Johnny or little Suzie is doing on the court than paying attention to us. Even with the best pre-games we often get the "Well I have been doing this for XX years and I know what I am doing." But the first situation comes up because they were not paying attention nor had no idea what things they were to keep track of. So please stop telling us what that stupid book says when I bet most states that even use that manual probably never distribute that to their schools for this kinds of duties and instructions.



And that is two more times than should be requested. Imagine some kid that wants to text his girlfriend or reading emails on their Smartphone than knowing when the clock starts properly.



It is hard enough that you admitted you had to reset the clock 2 a game and where I know every college game we have at least one clock issue and it involves the shot clock as well. And I learned long time ago how to pay attention to the game clock and how it relates to the shot clock and we still have problems. Sorry, I think HS needs to stay away from this, at least where I live. Too many schools and too many problems now, I do not want to add to that by using something that if incorrect could affect possessions to a team. Not even teams hold the ball and this is not much of an issue anyway.

Peace

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 794786)

Well I am averaging twice a game at the college level to get simple mistakes like resetting the clock on a simply out of bounds or resetting the clock when the ball did not even hit the rim. And this is with partners that are very experience and probably go to more camps than the average official. Like BNR said, I would be terrified with all the HS officials that cannot concentrate hard enough to get the current rules right that are easier to follow.

Peace

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 794788)

How often in your games do you have good rapport with the table personnel?

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 794788)

It's a shame not everyone involved game management wise does not have a copy of the appendices of the Officials' Manual as those suggestions/recommendations have been helpful to me.

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 794789)

What the heck does this have to do with anything? I am not going on a date, I am working a game. And not being the Referee I have very little interaction with them at all.



Good for you, but as stated before not everyone uses them or gets them or even knows this book exists. None of this information means anything anyway if the people working have no clue what they are doing.

Peace

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 794619)

They could, but why would have have to?

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 794791)

Good rapport between table & floor officials: all are there to ensure the game goes smoothly as to game management. Clear communication is available.

If the information in the appendices were read and followed, there would be less chance of those working table being clueless.

I didn't even post anything under 4.0.3 Training the Table Officials which is what you're saying is irrelevant. It would become relevant if it was followed.

Originally Posted by BktBallRef (Post 794797)

As the technology continues to advance, devices are being created that do not meet the description that's addressed by the rule. That's why. Whether they address it with revised rules or case plays and interpretations, it's going to be necessary.

Originally Posted by BktBallRef (Post 794799)

You're talking out of your a$$. There are thousands and thousands of high schools across this country, which means there's tens of thousands of table officials. We run into incompetent table officials more often than you can possibly imagine. You can have all the "good rapport" in the world and and print all the appendices you want. It's not going to prevent Mary Jo Trainee Honey from texting her boyfriend when she should be paying attention to the game.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 794800)

Unless you're advocating a change to permit greater use of computers, every device out there is covered by the rule and every device on the horizon is also covered by the rule and is prohibited. A "computer" doesn't just mean a desktop or a laptop computer. Your smartphone is a computer too. A tablet is a computer. An iTouch is a computer. They're all just very small computers. They're all prohibited unless used for statistics only.

"transmission device" pretty much covers about anything that could be used to send or receive information form/to anywhere.

I suppose you could argue that we can't tell whether they are being used for stats or not but no rule change will change that.

Are you saying you think they should loosen the rule to allow computers of some types?

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 794804)

Nowhere did I state it would be a foolproof solution.

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 794791)

Good rapport between table & floor officials: all are there to ensure the game goes smoothly as to game management. Clear communication is available.

If the information in the appendices were read and followed, there would be less chance of those working table being clueless.

I didn't even post anything under 4.0.3 Training the Table Officials which is what you're saying is irrelevant. It would become relevant if it was followed.

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 794821)

What are you living in, Fantasy land? No one gives a darn about rapport with people that still do not know how to do their job.

I do not care what the damn book says if the people you claim should read it have no idea what that is. Just like many coaches do not know what a rulebook looks like, I think even less table people even know what an Official's Manual is, let alone what the NF is. Do you know how many cheat sheets or guidelines many of has seen over the years. I even know officials that give the table a little sheet to cover guidelines and they still screw up basic stuff. Again if table people would not screw up basic stuff like the darn possession arrow, then maybe I would have more faith in their ability to start and stop a clock appropriately outside of the game clock. You cannot be that ignit can you?

Peace

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 794825)

Did no one get my message about going back on topic concerning iPads being present on the bench?

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 794825)

Did no one get my message about going back on topic concerning iPads being present on the bench?

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 794848)

Did you get the message this is an officiating site, not one for scorekeepers and timers? When that happens then I will worry about what you want to talk about. ;)

Peace

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 794825)

Did no one get my message about going back on topic concerning iPads being present on the bench?

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 794793)

Back on topic:

How often do you see bench personnel with a computer/tablet during the game?

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 794825)

Did no one get my message about going back on topic concerning iPads being present on the bench?

Originally Posted by rockyroad (Post 794891)

I had the same exact scenario last season (towards the end of the season). Assistant coach sitting on bench with an I-Pad. He said "But I'm just using if to take stats!" Told him I didn't care, that it had the capability to transmit and receive and he couldn't use it.

They "protested" the game...the local Association passed that on to the state. State said that the officials were correct in not allowing it to be used.

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 794898)

That sounds as if there is to be no transmission devices or electronic devices on the bench whatsoever.

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 794848)

Did you get the message this is an officiating site, not one for scorekeepers and timers? When that happens then I will worry about what you want to talk about. ;)

Peace

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 794898)

That sounds as if there is to be no transmission devices or electronic devices on the bench whatsoever.

Originally Posted by Welpe (Post 794900)

Note the verb "use" in rocky's post?

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 794901)

Technically 2.1 states that table personnel are officials. The Table Officials are present to assist the game officials.

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 794903)

ISome may look at it as no electronic devices allowed at all.

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 794767)

Very true, also more than likely most table personnel do not know about the rule book.

I've noticed over the past couple of years, that I'm the only table personnel that has reference materials present at the table.

Originally Posted by That Don Guy (Post 794906)

"Isn't checking the book at the 10-minute mark to make sure the starters are there your job?", was because I didn't want to risk a technical being called for some strange reason.)

Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 794904)

No, it doesn't. It says that the timer and scorer are assistants. Completely different.



Only one looks at it this way, and he is wrong.

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 794916)

The device may be present on the bench, but if it is not being used then there is no rule being broken.

Originally Posted by constable (Post 795028)

Anyone else think this rule is somewhat foolish and irrelevant now?

I see no harm in a coach using an Ipad to diagram a play. Am I alone?

Originally Posted by constable (Post 795028)

Anyone else think this rule is somewhat foolish and irrelevant now?

I see no harm in a coach using an Ipad to diagram a play. Am I alone?

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 795084)

I think the rule is more relevant now than it was when I started. We barely had cell phones or they were not very popular. People now can transmit things with an IPad or tablet a lot easier than you can many other things from outside of the bench. Also remember that the rule outlaws video as well being used in that situation. So it is a little more than diagramming a play that is at issue on an IPad.

Peace

Originally Posted by rockyroad (Post 795102)

Agreed...with an ipad they can show the team videos of what is going on on the court and use that to discuss things. I know, 60 seconds isn't a lot of time...but those things do way more than keep stats and draw plays.

Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 794381)

10-2-3: A team may not:

Use television monitoring or replay equipment or computers (other
than for statistics) for coaching purposes during the game or any intermission or
use a megaphone or any mechanical sounding device or any electronic
transmission device at courtside for coaching purposes, or electronic equipment
for voice communication with players.

Originally Posted by CoachP (Post 800588)

Football has coaches sitting "upstairs" in a booth transmitting to coaches on the sideline. Why should basketball be special?

(Not using an iPad yet, nor am I planning on, nor am I saying we need a rule change, just sayin)

And I need to get my post count up. The eagle has doubled me up and I have been a member almost 3 years more....

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 794800)

"transmission device" pretty much covers about anything that could be used to send or receive information form/to anywhere.

Originally Posted by The_Rookie (Post 800581)

This is a hot button issue in So Cal right now...Our state instructional chair told us to shut down the IPADS on the bench! Too hard for us to determine if they are used for stats only or coaching purposes..so shut them down!

Has this been an issue in other parts of the Country?

Originally Posted by CoachP (Post 800588)

Football has coaches sitting "upstairs" in a booth transmitting to coaches on the sideline. Why should basketball be special?

(Not using an iPad yet, nor am I planning on, nor am I saying we need a rule change, just sayin)

And I need to get my post count up. The eagle has doubled me up and I have been a member almost 3 years more....

Originally Posted by Zoochy (Post 800614)

NFHS Office has issued the following statement:

“The use of an iPad or computer is approved as long as they are just replacing a traditional paper alternative, they would meet the spirit and intent of the rule and be permitted. If they are being used to review video or some type of electronic communication, they are prohibited.”


The penalty for violating rule 10-1-3 is a team technical foul. Please refer to the NFHS Basketball Case Book: 10.1.3A and 10.1.3B for examples.

**Applications are available for the ipad to be used like a marker board. This is acceptable as long as it is not used to review video or other forms of electronic communication.

Originally Posted by bainsey (Post 800610)

This is one rule I think we can do without. We want our schools to be technologically advanced and prepare our kids for the future, but don't allow using such tools in a game? I think we should be encouraging such use.

Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 800612)

Now there's a worthy ambition. Be more like the eagle.

Originally Posted by Judtech (Post 800661)

I think the unintended consequence would be the video capabilities of tablet computers. On the 'good' side it could be used just like a camera to record the game. Which would make it prudent to ask the tablet user do somewhere other then the bench.
The 'bad'. After a bang bang call, the coach calls a TO (or not) and proceeds to show you the replay from their angle! Now that would be fun!

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I disagree. Not all schools have the same resources to compete in that way.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 800707)

Even if the technology was allowed, this would earn him a quick seat.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 800707)

Even if the technology was allowed, this would earn him a quick seat.

Originally Posted by bainsey (Post 800725)

You could say that about any resources.

Some schools have funds for nicer weight rooms, better equipment, better staffing (a big plus, ultimately), etc. All of these things can benefit a team. Technological items are merely among the tools one could use to improve one's work. And, by the way, these items are getting more and more affordable every year.

...

Originally Posted by bainsey (Post 800725)

You could say that about any resources.

Some schools have funds for nicer weight rooms, better equipment, better staffing (a big plus, ultimately), etc. All of these things can benefit a team. Technological items are merely among the tools one could use to improve one's work. And, by the way, these items are getting more and more affordable every year.

Whether a coach chooses to use a clipboard, pen and scratchpad, or iPad, they're all tools to meet a desired end. They'll never take the place of coaching, but, if used properly, they can indeed help improve performance. If they didn't, football coaches wouldn't have been trading game films, as they have for decades.

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 800741)

Weight rooms are not inherently an advantage as the game of basketball requires more than a weight room to be a good and players and coaches would have to do more to be a good player than lift weights.

Originally Posted by bainsey (Post 800753)

Actually, a good fitness room, when used properly, can be a big advantage to conditioning, when use properly. Still, as been stated by others, this is about what's used during the game.

Originally Posted by bainsey (Post 800753)

Once again, all things technological are tools, nothing more, nothing less. A coach's tool could be many things: clipboards, spiral notebooks, dry-erase board, BlackBerry, etc. It seems that some have a fear of certain tools, just because they're electronic or can shoot video.

Originally Posted by bainsey (Post 800753)

What are we afraid of here, really? That certain schools have better resources than others? That already goes for many things, during the game. That only the rich schools can afford such tools? Again, these tools are far more affordable than before. That players/coaches can look at video right there on the bench? So what if they can? What's wrong with a little ingenuity to perform better, regardless of the task?

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 800776)

If you can coach you can identify things without a computer. And you certainly should not have others not on the bench giving you information from some other point of the gym which is why many of these devices are outlawed. I do not think that is too much to ask.
Peace

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 800776)

Ever heard of P90X?

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 800776)

It is just a reality that a rural or inner-city school for example that may not have adequete computers normally now could compete against a private or suburban school that has more resources and use those things.

Originally Posted by bainsey (Post 800794)

Just started last week. Damn plyometrics had me sore for days!

Originally Posted by bainsey (Post 800794)

Here are some more realities: We're not talking about servers here. There are far more expensive things today that teams must deal with than handheld devices. And, schools must find a way to afford PCs in order to prepare our youth for the 21st century world. Since handheld devices are affordable for all, that argument of the haves and have-nots is simply antequated. I've dealt with very rural schools, and they're certainly not without technology.

Originally Posted by bainsey (Post 800794)

That's not hyperbole, Rut. That's truth. People fear change.

Originally Posted by bainsey (Post 800794)

The competition would only be unequal if one team was allowed to use a device, and the other team wasn't. Let the coaches decide what devices they want to use to do their jobs. One team almost always has advantages over another, and that's just life. This realm should be no different.

Originally Posted by bainsey (Post 800794)

...


That's not hyperbole, Rut. That's truth. People fear change.

....

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 800802)

We argue over what we are paid and if schools can afford a 3rd official and now we expect schools to compete in an activity that many have considered dropping all together because of expenses and we want to allow schools to use things based on a technology advantage?

Originally Posted by bainsey (Post 800819)

I want to allow schools and coaches the choice of using such devices. No-one says they have to.

Besides, you could be a better coach without such devices or a substandard coach with them. I may not need a clipboard or any other tool to coach. Ultimately, it should be up to the individuals using them.

Originally Posted by bainsey (Post 800819)

Reality check, Rut: Often times, sports is indeed a test between the haves and have nots. Consistently, those towns with better youth programs result in more victories in middle and high school. Sports is a microcosm of life, and one thing that life teaches us is that it isn't always fair. (Just ask the kid upon whom you called that foul.) If you're saying that no-one should have something that some cannot afford, that's hardly preparing anyone for life.

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 800826)

Also not everyone understands how to use those things so you will have another advantage based on technology and not coaching the sport.

Originally Posted by bainsey (Post 800850)

Who says the two can't go hand-in-hand? Besides, if one coach knows more about something than the other coach, then yes, that's life, too.

Originally Posted by bainsey (Post 800850)

It's not often that the NF would look at the pros as a blueprint for anything. The pros, of course, address very specific areas that can and cannot be videoed, and those areas are far more detailed than I understand. Are there parallels? Probably. We'd have to look at what exactly those pro rules entail, as they rely on video more than high schools do to keep their jobs.

Originally Posted by bainsey (Post 800850)

I'd imagine rocket shoes would be nixed pretty quickly, based on safety issues alone.

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 800855)

Seriously there was a shoe that claimed to give players a boost in jumping ability, many states outlawed those shoes usage.

Originally Posted by bainsey (Post 800794)

Just started last week. Damn plyometrics had me sore for days!


Here are some more realities: We're not talking about servers here. There are far more expensive things today that teams must deal with than handheld devices. And, schools must find a way to afford PCs in order to prepare our youth for the 21st century world. Since handheld devices are affordable for all, that argument of the haves and have-nots is simply antequated. I've dealt with very rural schools, and they're certainly not without technology.


That's not hyperbole, Rut. That's truth. People fear change.


The competition would only be unequal if one team was allowed to use a device, and the other team wasn't. Let the coaches decide what devices they want to use to do their jobs. One team almost always has advantages over another, and that's just life. This realm should be no different.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 800864)

Coaches do make the rules. Just sayin