Wisconsin overtime controversy

[Rich]

Originally Posted by asdf

"Coach, while we won't have a snap until you are out there, that snap will be a bit closer to the goal line than you expected."

I doubt I'd go there.

It would take a fair amount to get to a flag, too, although I agree that would happen before we had a snap with no defense.

[GBFBUmp]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

"I wasn't at that game and don't know exactly what happened, but I can guarantee you we would not allow a snap with the defense at the sidelines."

Perfect answer Rich.

[silverpie]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

I just find it bizarre that OT points would be figured in "point differential"! It should go into the standings calculation as a win by 0.

In Texas, tie-breakers are a matter of district adoption--but every state I've seen that uses point differential in a statewide system treats overtime as a win by 1. (I'd even suggest making that the official result, as in a wrestling meet decided by tiebreaker or an NHL game that goes to the shootout.)

[Robert Goodman]

For betting purposes, it should be considered a win by 0.5 .

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by Robert Goodman

For betting purposes, it should be considered a win by 0.5 .

Yes, for HS athletics.

[parepat]

"Coach, make sure your players are out at the proper time and we won't have to worry about it"

[Steven Tyler]

There was a situation a few years back when officials stopped the game after the 3rd OT with the game tied. They were under the impression/uninformed that was the max allowed under the rules.

[silverpie]

Originally Posted by Steven Tyler

There was a situation a few years back when officials stopped the game after the 3rd OT with the game tied. They were under the impression/uninformed that was the max allowed under the rules.

In West Virginia in the regular season, it is.