May I ask a dumb question?

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

Well, as I said, it only needs to be used when it's unclear who the foul is on. Would you be happier if I said it's being "scaled back"?

There might be a "scaling back" in your area, but around here we are instructed to still use it if you are doing "Men's games." And when I watch the Big Ten or Big 12 and Conference USA, it is still used greatly in those games. And if you are doing a NF game, you better birddog on every foul if you are going to make the evaluators happy.

Peace

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by JRutledge
There might be a "scaling back" in your area, but. . .

Not only is there a scaling back in my area, but there's a scaling back in the NCAA manual. As you noted yourself it's in the manual, but. . .

The CCA Men's Manual just does not require it for all fouls.

It used to be required for all fouls. It's no longer required for all fouls. It's been scaled back.

Chuck

[Jim Armstrong]

In Texas at the H.S. level our state Assoc. says bird dogging is optional, although our local chapter doesn't want us to do it at all.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

Not only is there a scaling back in my area, but there's a scaling back in the NCAA manual. As you noted yourself it's in the manual, but. . .

It used to be required for all fouls. It's no longer required for all fouls. It's been scaled back.

Chuck

I have not been officiating for decades, so understand that I do not have 20 years in of experience on this particular issue. But not using the birddog has been the same way for several years, or at least the years I have been officiating. I have never known of a time (during my officiating career) that the birddog was ever used for all fouls. So personally I do not know how it can be scaled back if it has stayed the same in about 8 years. Seems to me they just changed the usage, but it was still used by the D1 Officials all through the NCAA Tournament. And the birddog has stayed the same throughout my career at the NF level. So at least during my career, there has been no scaling back.

Peace

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by JRutledge

But not using the birddog has been the same way for several years, or at least the years I have been officiating. I have never known of a time (during my officiating career) that the birddog was ever used for all fouls.

Your point, while possibly interesting (but possibly not) and very likely true, is completely irrelevant. There was a time when the birddog was supposed to be used for all fouls. Now, the birddog is NOT supposed to be used for all fouls. It has been scaled back. Your personal experience of using the birddog makes not the least difference as to the truth or falsity of my statement above.

My statement above is true. Whatever else you want to say about birddogging is fine with me. Have a day.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by ChuckElias


Your point, while possibly interesting (but possibly not) and very likely true, is completely irrelevant. There was a time when the birddog was supposed to be used for all fouls. Now, the birddog is NOT supposed to be used for all fouls. It has been scaled back. Your personal experience of using the birddog makes not the least difference as to the truth or falsity of my statement above.

My statement above is true. Whatever else you want to say about birddogging is fine with me. Have a day.

Well it has been the same in the books for about ten years. Does not seem like a whole lot of change to me. Designs for cars change more than that.

Peace

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by JRutledge

Well it has been the same in the books for about ten years. Does not seem like a whole lot of change to me. Designs for cars change more than that. [/B]

Do you have some compulsive disorder that makes you repeat irrelevant facts? Hey, fine with me.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by ChuckElias
There was a time when the birddog was supposed to be used for all fouls. Now, the birddog is NOT supposed to be used for all fouls. It has been scaled back. [/B]

Those are simple,concise and 100% correct statements.

That's the bottom line!

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by ChuckElias


Do you have some compulsive disorder that makes you repeat irrelevant facts? Hey, fine with me.

This shows your true colors. This is why I always find you interesting. Everytime someone does not see things your way, you resort to name calling and insults.

You have not mentioned the year that a change was made. I said at least since the time I have been officiating the mechanics on birddogging have stayed the same. You have not stated the year the change was made. I have never remembered a time in my life when NBA officials birddogged at all. NCAA Men's Officials have always birddogged that I can remember and still do quite often. I do not watch or did not care about Women's or Girl's basketball before I became an official, so I have no idea what was going on there before.

I guess the glass is half full to one, half empty to another. But then again, maybe it just stayed the same (ten years is not much change in my opinion).

Peace

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by JRutledge

Everytime someone does not see things your way, you resort to name calling and insults.

I neither insulted you nor called you a name. You made a point which was correct but not relevant to the issue at hand. I pointed that out to you and you responded by making the same irrelevant point. I was merely asking if you did this out of some compulsion, like people who can't stop washing their hands. I think probably it was a little insensitive to people who truly do have compulsive disorders, and for that I apologize to anyone I offended. But I did not insult you in any way.

You have not mentioned the year that a change was made.

Irrelevant. The change was in fact made. That's not up for debate. I only need 2 facts to make my point and that's the first one. The change was made.

I have never remembered a time in my life when NBA officials birddogged at all.

Again, irrelevant, since we are only talking about NCAA mechanics.

NCAA Men's Officials have always birddogged that I can remember and still do quite often.

Irrelevant. Again, true. But irrelevant. They will probably always bird-dog when the fouler is not clear.

I do not watch or did not care about Women's or Girl's basketball before I became an official, so I have no idea what was going on there.

Only there?

As I said previously, bird-dogging used to be required on every foul called in the NCAA. It is no longer required on every foul called in the NCAA. It has been scaled back.

Have a day!

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by ChuckElias


As I said previously, bird-dogging used to be required on every foul called in the NCAA. It is no longer required on every foul called in the NCAA. It has been scaled back.

Have a day!

And umpires used to wear outside protectors once upon a time too. But because that is true, I would not call that change a scaling back because that is no longer the case in Baseball Umpiring. One time it was the case, but that has changed more than 10-15 years ago. But then again, I have a right to my opinion and the way I look at the situation. Because when I look around, things have been the same for a very long time. Oh well.

Peace

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by JRutledge
And umpires used to wear outside protectors once upon a time too. But because that is true, I would not call that change a scaling back because that is no longer the case in Baseball Umpiring.

I can agree with that. I would call that more like being phased out. . . .

[mick]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

I can agree with that. I would call that more like being phased out. . . .

You guys are wrongo !!!!
Honigs is still selling those big pillows.
So, "HA!" ...to both of you.
mick

---

My wife told me, "It's a fact that men are too opinionated."