Taking On A Pack Of Viscous Hyenas

[asdf]

Originally Posted by ajmc

I have no interest in preaching anything to you,

Then you proceed to preach 5 paragraphs on what "it" is.

Originally Posted by ajmc

I don't know if that's because you just don't want to get it, or you're not bright enough to understand what "it" actually is.

Name calling, viscious insults??? I now see what "it" is.......

"It" (you) (are) is a hypocrite.


Do as I say, not as I do..... I guess you are not worried that the kids that google this thread may see that.


This is too easy, I'm done with you.... Feel freee to get the last shot in.

Consider yourself................ exposed......... again........

[zebra295]

Thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to circle back and address a couple issues with you. First off, this discussion addresses certain behavior deemed reprehensible by many of your colleagues and this discussion is not at your beckoning call to go away. The best way to eliminate this type of topic is simply to behave.

I also wanted to respond to your earlier reply about supposed infractions on the A-11 video, "Upon close video study, numerous IDF, IM, IS and IF fouls are evident". So, heres a question: If you don't want to see Kurt Bryan on your officials discussion forums, why do you keep spreading false information about the A-11 offense? The arrogance of this this comment is unbelieveable and a downright insult to the officials who worked that game. In making this statement you are basically accusing the crew of incompetence for missing "all these calls" that you are supposedly seeing on the video, even though they were working the game in person. This a major area for football in the country and it’s a fact the officials have competently managed the 22 A-11 games properly and without issue. Per the 50 year veteran head of official in the area, it's not an issue! Get over it! To keep spreading these false misconceptions only makes you look stupid in the face of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Once again, another example of more insulting behavior towards other officials.

For the rest of you, good work in continuing to miss the point and solidifying my position.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by zebra295

I also wanted to respond to your earlier reply about supposed infractions on the A-11 video, "Upon close video study, numerous IDF, IM, IS and IF fouls are evident". So, heres a question: If you don't want to see Kurt Bryan on your officials discussion forums, why do you keep spreading false information about the A-11 offense? The arrogance of this this comment is unbelieveable and a downright insult to the officials who worked that game. In making this statement you are basically accusing the crew of incompetence for missing "all these calls" that you are supposedly seeing on the video, even though they were working the game in person. This a major area for football in the country and it’s a fact the officials have competently managed the 22 A-11 games properly and without issue. Per the 50 year veteran head of official in the area, it's not an issue! Get over it! To keep spreading these false misconceptions only makes you look stupid in the face of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Once again, another example of more insulting behavior towards other officials.

For the rest of you, good work in continuing to miss the point and solidifying my position.

How in the hell do you know what issues officials may or may not have with a particular team or offense? I worked the offense and I personally called several penalties for players not lining up properly or going downfield when they were not supposed to. Are you trying to say that this offense or players running it never got a penalty? What is your definition of "issues?" And if someone did have issues, what the heck does that have to do with anything said here.

You have got to be one of the dumbest officials (which it is becoming clear you are not an official) I have ever talked to, if you believe that someone cannot watch a tape and see mistakes made by the officiating crew. We discuss plays all the time that were seen on tape those plays and comment all the time on whether the officials were in position or if the official made a mistake in not catching a penalty. That happens all the time in my state alone with state finals games. I am sure I will be on tape about something come summer time. If anyone is arrogant in this discussion it is you. Considering you seem to not know basic discussions that we have here or that we cannot comment on something or someone that keeps coming here (You do not see us going to coach's websites to talk about this issue now do you?). And I know you are going to accuse me of character assassination of you because I am commenting on your very words and obvious lack of how things work when people share opinions.

Dude, you are not going to change the things people say. If Kurt does not like what people say on this board, then he better not come here time and time again (All you need is the "Dr. Official" and I would know it was you Kurt). And it is not out of bounds ever to comment on an offense that skirts the rules or someone needs to write a paper to justify why the rules should be changed. And if this was not an issue, the NF would not have sent out surveys asking officials what we think of a rules change to mirror the other levels that clearly outlaw such an offense.

Get over it, go away. Take your little rants to coach's boards where they care about this issue. And the more and more you keep talking about this, the more and more you are not going not have people in the room to keep this rule the same. It looks like you are trying to campaign for an election rather than deal with the facts of the rules or why people have problems with the rules.

Peace

[zebra295]

You still don't get it. Its about the insutling behavior of naming a discussion in a potentially libelous manner and other officials treating anyone who doesn't share their opinions in an un-gentlemanly tone. Its not about the A-11, dude! It's about people being so arrogant they keep mis-representing reality at the expense of fellow officials, to satisfy the crushing of an individual. Its about giving officials a bad name for trying to trash the name of a high school coach. Its about "the internet is forever". That's what this is all about, dude. If you have $50K to blow on defending yourself from a libel suit, whether your win or not, be my guest.

[Adam]

Rut, I lost track. Did he ever quote something you said that was specifically out of line?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Rut, I lost track. Did he ever quote something you said that was specifically out of line?

No he did not. I am still waiting.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

No he did not. I am still waiting.

Peace

That's what I figured.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by zebra295

You still don't get it. Its about the insutling behavior of naming a discussion in a potentially libelous manner and other officials treating anyone who doesn't share their opinions in an un-gentlemanly tone. Its not about the A-11, dude! It's about people being so arrogant they keep mis-representing reality at the expense of fellow officials, to satisfy the crushing of an individual. Its about giving officials a bad name for trying to trash the name of a high school coach. Its about "the internet is forever". That's what this is all about, dude. If you have $50K to blow on defending yourself from a libel suit, whether your win or not, be my guest.

I would love for you to try. And then I would use all the comments from the Chicago Tribune article, the NF website, this website and you have clearly not shown one comment here how I have talked about this more than what was said. And remember there is such thing as a counter-suit and I know many officials that are lawyers that would have no problem helping out in such a case.

You have yet to show one comment that I said was not true or was even about a specific person. It is obvious you do not know the law. To be held responsible for libel or defame someone's character, you have to say things that are not true and that malicious. If you are a convicted felon and someone repeats that you are a convicted felon that is not against the law. So if Kurt claims that the offense was approved, and no such action was taken by the NF and people point that out, then it is not something you can find liable for.

We are talking about what people think of an offense. And the person that came here specifically asked for comments on this offense, has made statements that have been found out as false (like he is not making money off of this "product") have been completely proven to have misrepresented the facts. Just because you do not like my comments does not make my comments untrue.

As I said before, I am still waiting for what I said that was not true. I guess I will be waiting for awhile.

Peace

[daggo66]

Originally Posted by zebra295

You still don't get it. Its about the insutling behavior of naming a discussion in a potentially libelous manner and other officials treating anyone who doesn't share their opinions in an un-gentlemanly tone. Its not about the A-11, dude! It's about people being so arrogant they keep mis-representing reality at the expense of fellow officials, to satisfy the crushing of an individual. Its about giving officials a bad name for trying to trash the name of a high school coach. Its about "the internet is forever". That's what this is all about, dude. If you have $50K to blow on defending yourself from a libel suit, whether your win or not, be my guest.

Why do you care? How do you know whether or not that I may in fact be an attorney?