Call on the court = Block. Your opinion?

[Camron Rust]

(liberal use of editing in the quotes below)

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Wow...I thought listening to my 7th graders argue about who was better at bump on the playground was tiring... (snip)

Originally Posted by JRutledge

When you have trolls on this site, this happens. At some point people have to be willing to state their opinion and live with it. (snip)

Originally Posted by 7IronRef

Yet you still keep commenting, because you know my name, and you cannot let it go. I am in your dome
(snip)
The reality is that we disagreed on the play(s) which is what referee's do. With this group the play is basically 50-50.

What is REALLY funny is that the two actually agreed on the play. ...

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I have a block on this play. The defender never stops and is coming forward toward the shooter.

Originally Posted by 7IronRef

You rendered your decisions on both calls, and your judgment is incorrect on both. You called one a block and the other a PC. Yes, these are your opinions on both calls, but in both plays the defense is moving into the path of the shooter. In both cases you got it wrong, especially if you subscribe to the teachings of the NCAA, which you claim you do.

Originally Posted by 7IronRef

In both cases the defender is moving forward and into the offense, this time the L started to show...she learned her lesson and was really slow in the C-ship game to avoid the BLARGE

Originally Posted by 7IronRef

If you want to whip out resume's, fine by me. I am pretty sure mine is longer and fatter

This is probably the longest argument I've seen where the two sides didn't realize they had actually agreed. It really looks like ONE of the two was more intent on attacking the other rather than discussing the play. Fore!

[JetMetFan]

This is probably the longest argument I've seen where the two sides didn't realize they had actually agreed. It really looks like ONE of the two was more intent on attacking the other rather than discussing the play. Fore!

Thanks, CR. I'd lost track of who had what opinion.

So I guess that means their disagreement is about the other block/charge play I posted from this game. Maybe I should move their whole string into that post?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

What is REALLY funny is that the two actually agreed on the play. ...


This is probably the longest argument I've seen where the two sides didn't realize they had actually agreed. It really looks like ONE of the two was more intent on attacking the other rather than discussing the play. Fore!

Actually I have to correct the record a little. You were kind of there but not totally complete in your references.

He was upset that I did not think that both plays that were posted were not seen the exact same and rule both were blocks that JetMetFan posted on the same day. I said one play was a block and the other was a charge. He claimed they were exactly the same and I should have ruled both blocks. He even suggested that the defenders did the exact same thing at the time of contact. Then two regular posters called him on that fact and instead of addressing their comments, he went after me again. My position was the both plays were not the same and why I felt one was a block (I believe in this thread) and the other play was a charge. And then he suggested that someone in their 30s is over the hill and needs to stop officiating, but if I recall this is a person that just started working college ball of any kind and asked a question about what to do in a college situation. I guess because I did not just start working college ball a year ago I am over the hill (sorry but that was the funniest insult). If being in your 30s makes you over the hill, and then most of the officials I work with must be decrepit as most are older than me by more than a few years. And these are very successful officials I am talking about. Most officials younger than me have not broken in to varsity ball or if they work college they are just getting started.

I am glad everyone in entertained but this was funny to me, because I was not talking to him at all in this thread until I was addressed. I do not back down from trolls like this.

Peace

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am glad everyone in entertained

Who said any of it was entertaining???

I think I made it clear that it was tiring.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Who said any of it was entertaining???

I think I made it clear that it was tiring.

Well do what a lot of folks do, ignore it. I know I do the same often when people get into it over what people get into it about on this site from time to time.

Actually Billy said it would be entertaining and even showed some popcorn (post #45 on Page 3), but I digress.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Actually Billy said it would be entertaining and even showed some popcorn.

JRutledge: I apologize for making light of this. Even veteran Forum members can have a difficult time figuring out who the real good officials are on this Forum versus average, or poor officials. Some Forum members can "talk the talk, and walk the walk", others can just "talk the talk". And that's all we do here, is talk. Many of us who have been on the Forum for any length of time may sometimes disagree with you, but I'm sure that most of us realize that you are an official who can probably "walk the walk".

Rookie Forum members have absolutely no idea who can really "walk the walk". Not a clue. I thought for sure that when the new poster "called you out" that you would tear him to shreds, but you didn't, you're too polite, too patient, and too respectful. So it really wasn't very entertaining.

Maybe 7IronRef will eventually earn our respect, after we all get to know him better. Maybe, someday, he'll become an esteemed member, and then we will all look back on this and have a good laugh.

If Jurassic Referee had been around? Now, that would have been entertaining.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Actually I have to correct the record a little. You were kind of there but not totally complete in your references.

He was upset that I did not think that both plays that were posted were not seen the exact same and rule both were blocks that JetMetFan posted on the same day. I said one play was a block and the other was a charge. He claimed they were exactly the same and I should have ruled both blocks. He even suggested that the defenders did the exact same thing at the time of contact.

I was attempting to back you up...he did just spend his entire time attacking you for whatever reason...not deserved for sure and incredibly wrong....and spent little to no time on the point.

He did say, somewhere, that you were wrong on both calls (you said one was a block and one was a charge) and he also posted a ruling where he said both were blocks. So, if you were wrong on the one in this thread, he was too, since you had the same ruling.

His statement here is where he contradicts himself...

Originally Posted by 7IronRef

You rendered your decisions on both calls, and your judgment is incorrect on both. You called one a block and the other a PC. Yes, these are your opinions on both calls, but in both plays the defense is moving into the path of the shooter. In both cases you got it wrong, especially if you subscribe to the teachings of the NCAA, which you claim you do.

BTW, you were wrong on the other once since I had the opposite ruling.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I was attempting to back you up...he did just spend his entire time attacking you for whatever reason...not deserved for sure and incredibly wrong....and spent little to no time on the point.

He did say, somewhere, that you were wrong on both calls (you said one was a block and one was a charge) and he also posted a ruling where he said both were blocks. So, if you were wrong on the one in this thread, he was too, since you had the same ruling.

I am so confused anyway because I really never got why it mattered in this thread what I thought about in another play in the first place. I just wanted to clarify that he thought the two plays were exactly the same which was pointed out to him. I was not taking your post as a slam, just wanted to clarify how silly his point was when he was ripping me about another play that was similar, but not the same. And if I was wrong, he really did not seem to notice that many others disagreed with him on how those plays should be ruled. It was all kind of silly and why I called him a troll. If you are trying to have a constructive discussion about these plays there was/is a case to be made on both sides. But he was obviously worried about what I thought more than anyone else.

Peace