What does Freddy think?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

Actualy there was. The NCAA Men's tournament was 65 teams from 2001-10.

You know better than to make grammatical or mathematical mistakes around here. You'll get chewed up and spit out.

[Bad Zebra]

Originally Posted by Moosie74

The Bangor Daily News is seemingly not concerned with accuracy or readability in their print edition so I don't think blogs would be held to any higher standards.

I've been to Bangor...not sure many of the residents would even notice

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

Actualy there was. The NCAA Men's tournament was 65 teams from 2001-10.

Silver beat me to it - but there were 64 GAMES from 2001-2010.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Bad Zebra

I've been to Bangor...not sure many of the residents would even notice

Ah, shaddap!

Anyway, this is all very oddly timed. I called my first violation of player-running-out-of-bounds in years over the weekend (5-6 boys), and oddly enough, it was a double violation! Technically, I think this is only supposed to be offensive violation, but at that age, both a foot out of bounds, I whistled, looked puzzled for a second, told them both not to do that again, and simply went POI.

Oh, the guy who assigned the game? The author.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Ah, shaddap!

Anyway, this is all very oddly timed. I called my first violation of player-running-out-of-bounds in years over the weekend (5-6 boys), and oddly enough, it was a double violation! Technically, I think this is only supposed to be offensive violation, but at that age, both a foot out of bounds, I whistled, looked puzzled for a second, told them both not to do that again, and simply went POI.

Oh, the guy who assigned the game? The author.

It's not only an offensive violation. There's a case play that verifies that. I'll have to check, but I don't think POI is right for a double violation. I think you go to the arrow.

[just another ref]

If one player from each team has a foot out of bounds, I don't think you have a violation at all, at any level.

Perhaps we need further clarification of the play at hand.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by silverpie

65 teams means 64 games. The two figures were equal only from 1976 (abolition of the regional third-place games) through 1981 (the last year of a national third-place game).

There I go, reading too fast again

Good thing I write for a living...

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

If one player from each team has a foot out of bounds, I don't think you have a violation at all, at any level.

Perhaps we need further clarification of the play at hand.

I think he meant they both were a foot out of bounds, not "had" a foot out of bounds.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I think he meant they both were a foot out of bounds, not "had" a foot out of bounds.

Right, as in 12 inches out of bounds (though it was a little more than that).

Anyway, are you sure you would go to the arrow? I think all double infractions result in POI, which would only lead to the arrow if there were no team control.

[Adam]

4-36-1, POI is for double fouls. 6-4-3c, simultaneous floor violations go straight to AP.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

6-4-3c, simultaneous floor violations go straight to AP.

Hmm, indeed so. Thanks. I wonder what the rationale is for that.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Hmm, indeed so. Thanks. I wonder what the rationale is for that.

Honestly, I think they're just slow to update it. They changed DFs to POI, because they happen more often. I think if they'd considered SVs, they would have made them POI as well.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

4-36-1, POI is for double fouls. 6-4-3c, simultaneous floor violations go straight to AP.

Which brings up the next question. In this play, I find it very unlikely that they both went out at the same time. First thing that comes to mind is that the offensive player went out first, chased by the defender.

Bainsey?

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Which brings up the next question. In this play, I find it very unlikely that they both went out at the same time. First thing that comes to mind is that the offensive player went out first, chased by the defender.

Bainsey?

Actually, one kid claims he was pushed by the other.

I was the lead. I probably had excessive focus in the lane (kids were camping out there frequently in that game), then looked at the end line to see A-1 and B-2 running significantly out of bounds, on the opposite side. I didn't see how they got there, so I just dealt with the issue and went POI (which wasn't correct by rule). No-one went OOB the rest of the game.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Actually, one kid claims he was pushed by the other.

I was the lead. I probably had excessive focus in the lane (kids were camping out there frequently in that game), then looked at the end line to see A-1 and B-2 running significantly out of bounds, on the opposite side. I didn't see how they got there, so I just dealt with the issue and went POI (which wasn't correct by rule). No-one went OOB the rest of the game.

I hope they change this rule to make it POI. Best case scenario is yours, where both teams do it. You can blow the whistle, tell them to stop, and they won't do it again.