What does Freddy think?
 

I think I'd be more concerned with all of the typos in the article if I were the author than what officials are or aren't calling.

If they are consistent and told by the assigner to call it that way I don't see a problem. Inconsistency would be a bigger problem IMHO.

Headline:

Blogger Needs To Hire Proof Reader

He actually conducted the first officiating class I took back in 1976.

You guys are so critical!
 

What's wrong with how he rights? ;)

Wrong Guy?
 

Sorry, but I never really was the Spelling Nazi here. Grammar Nazi, yes. Okay, and some pseudo-sensitivity to comments slamming plumbers, yes. Speeling Nazi, that must have been someone else.

"Dyslexics of America, Untie! :)

Or a proofreader?:)

Absoluetly Nohting

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.

Ouch

Nevermind that there was NEVER a "March Madness Tournament of 65 games".

Too harsh? I usually go to Bangor once or twice a year and I love reading the BDN mostly for the corrections column. They have become really good at at publishing "we regret the error" stories.

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

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).

Didn't think it was too harsh. I have no way of judging that.

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

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

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

Ah, shaddap! :D

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.

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.

There I go, reading too fast again ;)

Good thing I write for a living...

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

Wow, A Logical Post On The Forum, Cool ...
 

Not sure why I didn't think of it earlier, but if double violations go POI, then there's no punishment at all for the offense. Going to the arrow either takes the ball away or makes them use up a turn with the AP.

With double fouls, there is at least the addition to the foul count.