Conference 7.286::sports_90

I think it was several years ago, there was a study of sorts on the
accuracy of refs.

I seem to remember that Umpires got high marks, averaging around 95%
accuracy in their calls.  

I would think that your continuous flow games (soccer, hockey, basketball)
are somewhat harder to ref than what I call finite play games (football,
baseball).

I know that lasted season, I really thought the football refs had lost
a lot of "conviction" due to instant replay.  And NHL refs are extremely
inconsistent.

Soccer refs are an interesting breed, possessing a lot of power.
I saw an interesting play in a recent Arsenal game.  An Arsenal defender
was called for a foul in the box, which resulted in a penalty shot.
The replay should that it was a clean tackle with no intent to foul.

On the shot, Lukic, the Arsenal goalie, made the save.  The ref called him
for moving too early.  Replay showed that he did move a tad early, but
the commentator said "which goalie doesn't?".  On the re-try, Clough booted
the ball over the crossbar (and again, Lukic moved a tad early, but no
call).

I was just suprised at the quality of officiating in that instance, cause
usually they are pretty good....

JMHO,
fw

    
    	One of the basic misconceptions about basketball officials is
    that they miss a lot of calls.  I believe this to be far from the
    truth.  In fact, according to a literal interpretation of the rule
    book, the ref's are right about 99% of the time from where I sit.
    I know, I'm biased, cause I officiate basketball!  But one of the
    main problems with perception is the fact that the fans and COACHES
    do NOT know the rules!  Let me add that neither do the so-called
    experts that add comentary on TV.  I don't know how many times I've
    seen a commentator explain a situation incorrectly, then blame the
    ref.  I should also say that I do not put the NBA officials in the
    same hat as the Div. I guys, cause I think the NBA officials are
    out to lunch, but that is a different subject.
    	Given the fact that a referee (basketball) has to make several
    hundred split second decisions during a game, they do a pretty good
    job.
    
    	One simple question to you all.  What determines when body contact
    results in a foul?
    
    
    							bill..g.
    

    Watching the NCAA games this weekend, it struck me how inconsistent the
    calls were between games and even between halves of a game. In one game
    I actually saw a delay of game T called, when in just about every game
    the stall tactic was used. I saw two teams call timeouts when they had
    non. Both teams got Ts called, but only one of them got the timeout, so
    I'm sure that at least one ref blew it. I saw the Clemson coach
    standing at about midcourt during a foul call, and no T. If every play
    that drew equal contact was called the same, I wouldn't have a problem,
    but too many times it appears as though the white uniform gets away
    with a little more in a game. 
    
    Dennis
    

I give, Bill...

I'll be the first to admit that I know very little about hoops.
It is not one of my favorites, so I don't feel I'm qualified...

The funniest part to me is when the ref calls offensive foul and
whacks the back of his head.  That symbol usually refers to something
else around here ;^)

What's the answer???

'Saw

    Bill, whoever INITIATES the contact should have the foul called. Too
    often offensive players dip a shoulder, or push off with the "off"
    arm and not get called for it. Also in college it seems that they NEVER
    call a shooter for "clearing" away the defenders arms. Its a fallacy
    that a defender has to be stationary to draw a foul. You can defend 
    your position as long as you dont initiate the contact. Defenders 
    always get the foul and thats B.S., IMO.
    			Rich
    

    re .2
    
    Tell me about it !
    
    I did a girl's game in Newton, and in the second half, the home
    coach decided to ice the ball by letting his star player hang on
    to it as long as possible. 
    
    Well, she would spend as many as 15 seconds in the backcourt and
    people were getting me and my partner - real LOUD.
    
    Even the community-access announcers got into the act, "SHE'S SPENDING
    ALL DAY IN THE BACKCOURT ! WHERE'S THE 10-SEC VIOLATION !
    
    Yo people ! NEWSFLASH ! 
    
    **THERE IS NO 10-SECOND BACKCOURT COUNT IN WOMEN'S BASKETBALL !
    YOU CAN DRIBBLE ALL 30 SECONDS BACK THERE IF YOU WANT !**
    
    Well, after the 10th possession or so, people started to get the
    drift ...
    
    Ya gotta luv those 'experts' eh Goose ?
    
    Doc

    
    	I believe that a foul should only be called when the person
    committing the foul gains an advantage. Otherwise, the game would take
    8 hours to play. Imagine if they called EVERY a foul every time contact
    was made. I think that is what Goose meant by his question.
    
    	I've also seen a few good no-calls this year. I saw one guy get
    hacked making a long pass. The call wasn't made and thy got a dunk out
    of it. Good no-call. 
    
    						Dana
    

>         <<< Note 186.7 by VCSESU::LANE "Build it and he will come" >>>
>                         -< Only in case of ADVANTAGE >-
>
>    
>    	I believe that a foul should only be called when the person
>    committing the foul gains an advantage. 
    
    Exactly!  In fact, I saw this on that State Farm Rules of the Game
    hooha they run with that ACC head of officials.
    
    They showed two clips of a lot of bumping going on in the lane.  The
    first clip showed Danny Ferry up against the defender; neither was
    gaining an advantage from all the bumping so no foul was called.  The
    second clip was Mark Alarey (sp?) up against a defender; he dipped his
    shoulder and pushed off and an offensive foul was called because he
    gained an advantage from the contact.
    
    Now, if they'd only call it consistently and like it's written, no one
    would b!tch.
    
    	--dan'l

    
    re: fouls
    
    	The last couple of replys have the right idea!  Basically,
    basketball is a contact sport and there is going to be some pushing
    and bumping in such close quarters!  
    	What determines whether a foul is called, or not, is whether the
    player is put at a disadvantage by contact, or gains an advantage
    by contact.  I've discussed many times in here, and in the Celtics 
    conference about circumstances around fouls and violations.  
    	The block/charge is also the call that gets the most attention,
    but it's really one of the easiest to make.  SELLING the call
    is what makes all the difference!  BTW, the defender does NOT have
    to be "planted", or not moving in order to get a call.  The rule
    states that a defensive player simply has to be in a "legal" guarding
    position before contact, or before the player becomes airborne. 
   	Remember, it is the dribblers responsibility to avoid contact.
    The dribbler does not have a green light to go where ever he wants.
    If a defensive player is there first, it is his responsibility to
    avoid contact.
    
    	Let's examine a situation to illustrate advantage/disadvantage.
    	Hope this helps.
    
    	Player A retrieves a rebound within inches of an out-of-bounds
    line.  Player B from the opposing team is also trying to get the
    same rebound but is unsuccessful.  Player B stops short of bumping
    player A but accidently makes contact with player A so that player
    A looses his balance and steps out of bounds.  This used to
    be called a force out in the NBA, but it is now called a foul. 
    Player B's contact was enough to put player A at a disadvantage
    causing player A to violate (out-of-bounds).  If the same contact
    would of occured on the floor, and player A didn't have the ball,
    it would be ignored.

    							bill..g.
    
    p.s. Since it's tourney time, I'll dig out some more stuff on the
    philosophy of officiating, not that it will help most of you, but
    it might give some of you an idea of how a ref "sees" the game!

    IMHO, the problem with pro sports is that athletes are constantly
    trying to push to the limits of what is acceptable given the rules
    of the game....AND WHAT THEY THINK THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH.
    
    There is nothing wrong with the first (i.e. pushing to the limit),
    but trying to "get away" with something borders on cheating - at
    least as far as I'm concerned - and the only way to stop this is
    to impose stiffer penalties for players who go beyond what is
    acceptable under the rules of the game.
    
    Obviously this easier said than done...but does the responsibility
    rest with the players to play fair or does it rest with the officials
    to enforce the rules????
    
    I also think that it is significantly harder to officiate
    free-flowing games like Hockey, Hoops and Soccer.  Stop/Start sports
    like Football and Baseball lend themselves to instant-replays and
    closer scrutiny of officials.  (Someone in an earlier note made
    this point, but it bears repeating)   If you introduce more stoppages
    to free-flowing games, they will lose some of their excitement and
    enjoyment, so you are stuck with a DES  (Double-Edged Sword).  
    
    Referees, for all their faults, are aware of this DES and I believe
    they factor it into their decision-making when making (or not making)
    a call.  If they decide to play the 'advantage' in a game situation,
    they are letting the game flow, building excitement for fans and
    players alike.  Players in turn feel that this gives them the
    liberty to stretch the rules.  When the refs see this happening,
    they clamp down again and call more fouls.  (I believe this explains
    some of the inconsistencies you can see in games)
    
    The real question, however, is how do you let a game flow freely
    WITHOUT giving players the green light to stretch the rules.  I
    believe the answer is stiffer penalties.  I believe it is the players
    responsibility to keep the game respectable and if they choose to
    violate the rules of the game they should be made to pay for it.
    
    A few suggestions:
    
    	Introduce a penalty box in basketball and soccer
    
    	Let players accumulate "penalty points" over the course of a
    season.  Anytime a player exceeds a certain number of penalty points,
    the player is suspended for X number of games.  Similar to the booking
    system in soccer.
    
    
    I think that's enough for now.... let's see if this fuels some
    discussions!!
    
    Enjoying the discussions from afar,
    
    Puddle Jumper
    DEC-UK
                                        
    
    P.S. One last comment for fw re: .1  John Lukic did move both times
    and all goalkeepers do (its another way of stretching the rules).
     My suggestion would be to move the penalty spot six inches closer
    and take that advantage away.  Or make moving before a penalty kick
    a bookable offence.
    
    
    

unfortunately the soccer officials of FIFA have let many a gmae get totally 
out of control. Part of this reason is that they do not institute harsh
enough penalties for the infractions that occur. I was talking to some guys I
play with a few weeks ago and they mentioned a publication that had a minute
by minute break down of a world cup qualifying game that had 86 ! fouls in it.

It seemed that whenever maradona got the ball he was immediatly fouled to insure
that he didn't do anything creative. This type of fouling is all too prevalent
on the world cup scene and destroys the value of the game. It would be comparable
to having Bird or Johnson fouled every time they touched the ball and the only
result of the foul would be a in bounds play at half court. 

IMHO the world cup should institute some sort of foul counter like the NBA 
and when teams go over the limit some sort of free kick is awarded. Not 
neccesarily a penalty shot but some free kick that would result in an advantage
for the team that would cause defenders to think before they fouled.

Soccer is offiated much the same way as hoops. The ref should only call a 
foul if some advantage is gained on the play. Far too few people actually
know this...Far too players especially.....


Metz
 

re Puddle_Jumper:

	Yeah, I know Lukic moved...8^)  As a former goalie, I always
	root for them on the penalty shots.

	Personally, I don't mind some of the rule stretching that goes
	on, since that is, to me, essentially how a game grows over the
	years.

	I think it's probably tough to call the goalie moving beyond
	a certain granularity....

re Fouling Maradona:

	I'm not in favor of a foul counter.  What I think can and
	should happen is that if the ref, in his opinion, finds people
	are intentionally fouling, then they should be booked.

	If it continues, he can talk to each coach and warn them.

	There may not be a provision for that in the rules, but many
	times I've seen a ref call two opposing players to him after
	a foul, sternly talk to them, and have them shake hands.

	In my opinion, the ref in the Maradona match was not in control
	of the game...

re English Soccer:

	Go Liverpool!


'Saw

    Anybody ever see a water polo match?  The whole game is a game of
    intentional fouling that is part of strategy.  Then on the other hand,
    there is so much sh!t that happens under the water (i.e., holding,
    ripping suits, elbowing, kicking) that the refs either ignore or don't
    see; what a paradox.
    
    	--dan'l

    
    Never liked water polo.  I think it's cruel to the horses.
    
    

    And I could never get a decent follow-through swinging my putter in 5
    feet of water..........
    
    H'awk

>>   what a paradox.
    
What ?  You mean there's more than one DR. Midnight,  Nah, couldn't be.

		:-) :-) :-)   Chap

    The anti-BIG-8 movement was further exposed last weekend after
    it was found that NONE of the refs at the NCAA Wrestling Tourney
    were from the BIG-8 conference.
    
    Further investigation showed that the riding time, for BIG-8 matches,
    was kept on different clocks.  When a BIG-8 wrestler was in control
    of his opponent a clock with no second hand was used.
    
    Also, several "Busty Heart" types were hired to parade around the
    mats during the BIG-8 matches.  When a BIG-8 wrestler would get
    close to a pin a Busty Heart would fall to the mat, up close to
    the grapplers, and do some real unsightly things in front of the
    poor struggling BIG-8 wrestler.  The young buck would lose
    concentration (plus, it would become obvious why they call their
    outfits "tights").  These ol' non-BIG-8 Refs would leave the mat
    during this disruption, without a word, and reappear later--but
    completely discumbobulated and out of sorts.
    
    Its truly amazing that Oklahoma State was able to win their 29th
    NCAA Wrestling Championship (2nd in a row) with all these distractions
    and cheating going on.  Hopefully, more will be uncovered this week.
    
    Cowboy

    
    Must be another one of CBS plots to put more dazzle in the game (which
    it doesn't need) but the NCAA's this year have more like a pro-game
    than at any other time.
    
    3-seconds, traveling, and giving the continuation basket are becoming
    common nature to the game this year where as before they drew an 
    automatic whistle and the continuation was never given unless the guy 
    was in the air...
    
    refs have really sucked this year.....
    
    mike

    Any comments on the MLB umpires boycott of spring training?  The umps
    walked out saying they were upset that they weren't included in
    discussions involving the rescheduling of games as a result of the
    lockout.  Minor league umps will be overseeing the grapefruit and
    cactus leagues while the major league umps have said they will be there
    come April 9.

    Yeah, the TV timeouts have always been there, but the announcers didn't
    call them as explicitly as they do now. 
    
    I have to agree about the referreeing. There have been way too many
    wrong noncalls or questionable calls for my taste. And before anybody
    fires up the ol' flamer, I've referreed. Not at college level but
    plenty of highschool, city-league, and church league, so I know how
    tough the job is. But these refs look like they're right out of the
    pros.
    
    Now I don't mind watching a pro game but not when it's Chuck U. vs.
    Podunk. The game is different; the rules are different; let it be so.
    Also, certain teams (I won't name names but they are the farthest-west
    of the Final Four) have a reputation of talking trash. Not only at the
    opposing players but at the refs. In my opinion they should get exactly
    ZERO chances to badmouth the ref. Why can't they call technicals?
    
    Watching this particular team play yesterday there should have been at
    least three called on the players.
    
    ...mike
    

Yeah, Mac, I've got a comment re the Umps...

The whole thing is stupid.  I mean, the only ones stupider than the
owners, players and umps, is us -- for putting up with this BS.

We've become a nation of sheep.  The President says he doesn't like
broccoli, and right away the broccoli growers have a hissy.  I mean,
just because George doesn't like it don't mean I'm going to stop eating
it, and I eat a LOT of broccoli.  I guess the growers figure the sheep
are gonna see Nirvanna and stop eating broccoli.

So, now in baseball, the Umps had their little feelings hurt.  Too
damn bad.  They'd all learn really quick if a sizeable number of fans
had the cajones to say ____ you guys and the horses you rode in on.
We're gonna watch bowling this summer.  

But we the fans are stupid.

Tell the bums to get back out on the field.  When they are 100% perfect,
and when they prove that they can have a good effect on the game, and
not the detrimental one they always have, then let 'em squawk.

And BTW, in keeping with the theme, I saw a minor league ump make one
HELLUVA good call in the Sox game yesterday, on a foul-fair decision down
the third baseline.  Great call....


Chainsaw

    
    
    	Actually, I think the refs have done an amazing job in this
    years tourney.  As stated by many, there have been an incredible
    amount of games that have been really close and I think the ref's
    have handled them well.
    	The UConn last second win was right on.  Good call.  The Tech
    game against MSU, despite some people's opinion, was another well
    worked game and the last shot was correctly called.  One ref had
    a 3 pointer signaled but another came in and overruled which was
    I felt an amazing call given time running out and the fact that
    Anderson was defended by two MSU players..to see that foot on the
    line was a great call.
    	There have been some "no-calls", but that doesn't mean the ref's
    are doing a bad job.  Hey, they are going to miss some calls, who
    wouldn't?  It's been said that if a ref is calling the game at around
    95% then that is goodness.  Why is it that if a coach has a 20-4
    season that is considered good.  A ref makes one bad call or non-call
    and he is considered to have worked a bad game.
    	As for the T's, I've seen more this year and in this tourney
    than any year in memory.  I will say this, that the college game
    is not held hostage to the star player or coach, unlike the Pro's.
    Usually in the college game, it's the star player that gets into
    foul trouble unlike the pro's where the star player never gets called
    for a foul.
    	The college game is really at it's peak.  It is a well run game
    which shows no partiality to one team, player or coach.  I believe
    the Div. I refs to be the best in the world because they are allowed
    to call the game.  True, they are not perfect, but you will only
    please 50% of the people on a given call anyways.
    	
    
    								bill..g.
    

    Chainsaw, if you indulge in broccoli the night before the Patriots Day
    Red Sox game, and lEe indulges on brussel sprouts, there'd better be a
    stiff breeze blowin' in from da oshun........  :-)
    
    H�wk

H�wkst�r --

No need to worry, my friend.  The Chainsaw does not suffer
from Broccoli Affect(tm).  For some reason, Broccoli and I
have always gotten along really, really well....

You might have to worry if I have too many Doritos the night before
though....

I'll buy ya a beer at the R�t!


latered
Chainsaw

�They'd all learn really quick if a sizeable number of fans
�had the cajones to say ____ you guys and the horses you rode in on.
�We're gonna watch bowling this summer.  
�
�But we the fans are stupid.
    
    For watching baseball instead of bowling?  You've got to be kidding!
    
    ;^) With apologies to the bowling fans ;^)

    
    Bring back good ol' broccoli and do away with the designated vegetable!
    Jeez..remember when another one of our presidents said ketchup was
    one?
    
    -Dick
    

    Apparently just getting the exhibition season isn't enough for MLB. 
    They are now going to court to get the umps back to work.  The umps
    allegedly gave up their right to strike or otherwise refuse to do games
    in the last collective bargaining agreement, so MLB wants an injunction
    awarded to force them back to the ballparks.

    
    RE: baseball vs. bowling
    
    I don't see much difference, viewer excitement wise. In one you have a
    guy/gal rolling a ball and it comes back to him/her to roll it again.
    In the other you have a guy throwing a ball and another guy throwing it
    back to him. But if you spit in bowling the next guy/gal up might get a
    bit upset. Not much scratching in bowling, either.
    
                                                   HOOT
    

    > Not much scratching in bowling, either.
    
    Yeah, but bowlers tend to rub their balls a lot, even the women!
    
    :-)
    
    H�wk

    re .22: That's cOjones, sir.
    
    "cAjones" means "boxes", as in being asked by a beautiful Argentinian
    storekeeper, "?quiere Usted cAjones para ustedes naranjos?"   ... made 
    us STOP&THINK there for a second...
    
    (Or maybe you had to be there...)
    
    ...miguel�n
    

Sorry...

I don't know Spanish.  I only dabble in French, German and Russian.
So, I had to guess at it.   

Jess call me Se�or RCASO, si?  Si....

8^)

'Saw

    Iris Chacon - the plate stacking butt champeen of all time!!!!
    
    
    JD

    MLB and the umpires will be back in court.  Apparently they couldn't
    agree on the arbitrator, so the MLB umps will still be sitting out
    spring training.  There is also talk that the umps being left out of
    the discussions on how the season would be scheduled wasn't the only
    reason they walked.  There is a question over how they are affected
    financially by the loss of 32 spring training dates due to the lockout.

    
    The refs in the Clippers-Mizzou game deserve recognition in this note!
    
    Bob V.
    

    
    Terry "Looney" Cooney also belongs in the Refs Hall of Shame!
    

    
    	I've a question for allyou sanctioned refs out there. Someone told
    me of a rule change starting this season and I want to verify it. The
    other night during a DEC league game, I blundered and knocked the ball
    out of the hands of the person inbounding the ball. I was, of course,
    hit with an automatic T. I was later told that this rule has since
    changed and that the first occurence should only result in a warning.
    Could someone out there let me know if this rule change is real? Just
    curious. Thanks.
    
    
    							Dana

     Ah dana.... don't be so grabby next time....
    
    REK

    
    
    	The rule has changed!  I attended my annual interpretation meeting
    last night where they went over all the rule changes, and this was
    one of them.
    
    	Those of you who have followed at a distance the explanations
    about advantage/disadvantage when inbounding the ball can relate
    to this change.
    
    	The OLD rule stated that the player inbounding the ball could
    not break the out-of-bounds plane with their body or with the ball.
    Now, I said that if there was no defensive pressure, no ref in their
    right mind would call a player if he had an arm or leg over the
    line while throwing in the ball.  But if there was defensive pressure,
    no ref in their right mind would let the same situation go without
    calling a violation.
    
    	The new rule states that a player inbounding the ball may have
    part of his body over the line/plane as long as his "home" is still
    out of bounds.  This means that while inbounding, a player can have
    a leg, foot, arm, or ball over the line providing none of the above
    is actually touching the court inbounds.  Now, once the inbounding
    player holds the ball over the line, it is fair game to be batted
    at.  If a defensive player knocks the ball away in this situation,
    and the ball remains on the court, it is a legal play (last year
    it would of been a T).  The defensive player can also grab the ball
    and say, tie up the inbounding player and in this case we would
    have jump ball.  Remember, this is only dealing with a player that
    holds the ball over the line while inbounding it.
    
    	Now, if a defensive player reaches across the line and hits
    the ball while it is in the thrower-in's hands, that is STILL a
    T.  If a defensive player reaches across the line and FOULS the
    inbounding player, that is an intentional foul.  Going back to the
    new rule, if the inbounding player is holding the ball over the
    line and is fouled by a defensive player swiping at the ball, it
    is a COMMON foul, which means if the team is in the bonus, they
    will shoot.  If not, the ball will again be placed out of bounds
    for a throw-in.
    
    	So, it is legal to inbound the ball while part of your body
    is inbounds (none of which can be touching the court), and it is
    legal for a defensive player to hit the ball or try and grab it.
    
    	The penalty is if the inbounding player is fouled with the ball
    being held over the line, it is a common foul.  If the ball is hit
    while it is behind the line, it is a T, and if the inbounding player
    is fouled while he and the ball are behind the line, it is an
    intentional foul.
    
    	I'll check the warning issue...but I know that the warning is
    only for High School and not NCAA.  The warning is basically against
    the defense and they get one warning per game.  I can't remember
    all the details around the warning and I won't put in half-information
    here.  I'll post the warning info. tomorrow.
    
    							bill..g.
    

    
    	Thanks Goose! I think I'm gonna start bringing a rule book with me
    to my games. Is something like that correctable or is that something
    that has to be lived with? Just curious for future cases. Thanks.
    
    
    								Dana
    

    
    re: Dana
    
    	There are only 5 correctible errors and this is not one of them.
    
    re: new rule/inbounding
    
    	I rechecked my notes about the rule change I mentioned and as
    I thought, there is only a warning for High School and not for NCAA.
    
    	What the warning is:  The warning is given to the defensive
    team when a defensive player reaches across the in-bounding line
    or steps over the line.  If/when this happens, play will be stopped
    and the team will receive a warning.  The next infraction involving
    this situation will result in a T.  In NCAA, the player will be
    slapped with a T without a warning.
    
    	This is basically to stop the nonsense involving a team that
    has no timeouts and wants to stop the clock after a made basket
    with time running out.. You can mainly thank Georgetown for this
    one!!  Although it wasn't because of Georgetown, it was evident
    that this type of stuff at the end of game was putting the inbounding
    team at a real disadvantage and they wanted to stop this as well
    as allow the inbounding player a chance to break the out-of-bounds
    plane while inbounding the ball.
    
    	Remember, the warning involves the defense, and deals with breaking
    the plane while defending the throw-in.
    
    							bill..g.
    

At the tag end of last year's hoops season, there was some discussion
about the possibility of allowing, in the last (x) minutes of the game,
a team which had been deliberately fouled, to have an option of either
accepting the foul and going to the line, or declining the foul and
inbounding the ball at half court. (or getting one [ two ] foul shot(s)
and the ball out of bounds?)

I don't remember if that was just *our* discussion, or if there was some
discussion by rules bodies.

Anybody know anything about this?

I think it would be a great idea. I've never liked all the frantic
racing around at the end of a game, purposefully fouling people, the
last two minutes taking a half hour, and a deliberate foul actually
benefiting the fouling team. PHHSSSSSSHHHHHHHTTTTT!

Mike JN

    
    	RE: -2. Thanks again Goose. No offense but some of the refs i out
    league seem to have thier heads in certain places. Next time I think
    I'll ask thins ref if he was aware of the rule change.
    
    	RE: -1. I don't like it. Suppose you're down 2 with a minute to go
    and the other team has the ball? What do you do, hope someone throws
    the ball away? A decent team can just go four corners and the game is
    over. Now if there was a shot clock, then I"d think about it.
    
    
    							Dana
    

    
    re: Dana
    
    	No problem!  You'd be surprised at the ref's that will blow
    this call, as well as others that are new rule changes even after
    it has been emphasized about a hundred times.
    
    	One caution.  If you are playing defense, and you are guarding
    the inbounding player, make sure that he/she is holding the entire
    ball CLEARLY inbounds.  If the ball is just halfway over, and you
    hit it, it is a T.  So, you better make sure that the ball is entirely
    over the line.
    
    re: -1
    
    	This rule did not make it.  Although I think it will make it
    withing the next few years.  But it really all depends on how teams
    play.  If everyone remains slap happy at the end of the game, then
    a rule change will probably come about, but if coaches can find
    another way to get the ball back, then a rule change might not take
    place.
    
    	For the most part, no one wants to keep changing the rules,
    but sometimes the rules are just plain bad, worded incorrectly (unclear
    interpretation), or used for a purpose not intended for by a coach.
    In the latter case, a lot of coaches look for a way of twisting
    a rule, a way around it, or a way to use abuse it for gain.  For
    these reasons, the rules are changed, and not necessarily for the
    sake of change.
    
    							bill..g.
    

    
    Can anyone of you Zebra's explain the call in last night's 
    49'ers vs Cowboys game where Rice was face masked then fumbled,
    the play was blown incomplete then instant replay over-turned 
    the call saying he caught it at the 4 then gave the 9'ers 
    half the distance on the penalty. Isn't it still a fumble?
    
    
    
    Steve

       it's still a fumble, but the whistle blew the play dead. The 9ers
    woulda kept the ball anyway because of the penalty.
                                 Denny

    
    But where do you spot the ball, Denny? 
    
    
    
    Steve

       got to spot it where he fumbled I guess, then mark off the penalties
    from there.
                                   Denny

Well, I just wanted to come in here and say that we had a HORRENDOUS
ref on Saturday.  Granted, we spanked Danbury but good, but this
guy did a heinous job.  He clearly blew a call which would have 
awarded us a penalty try, and  I don't think he made one
reaching over after the ruck was formed call all day, and Danbury
was reaching over ALL the time...

phew.

Thanks, that felt better!

'Saw

    
    So the ruling is, Rice caught the ball spot it at the 4, the face
    mask resulted in a fumble therefore there is no fumble but a 15 yard
    penalty, half the distance to the goal. Pre-possesion foul on Dallas.
    Good call by the replay judge, bad call by the ref on the field that
    blew the whistle.
    
    
    
    Steve

    This has got to be the last year for instant replay.  Two calls
    yesterday used instant replay and inadvertent whistles to give another
    team an advantage rather than correct a questionable call.
    
    The call yesterday against the Jets was just plain ignorant and
    upsetting.  Even though I was rooting for the Dolphins, McKyer clearly
    dropped the ball before he went out of bounds.  The replay awarded the
    ball to the Jets but then an "inadvertent whistle" gave it back to the
    Dolphins.  Whistle or no whistle, that ball still belongs to the Jets. 
    I just don't understand.
    
    Then last night, Montana connects with Rice on a pass.  Issiac Holt
    grabs Rice's face mask right before he catches the ball.  Face
    mask call, not interference.  Rice takes two steps, Holt knocks the
    ball away, and Dallas recovers.  The replay rules the pass complete,
    but a whistle ruled the ball dead before Dallas recovered.  Come on
    boys, it's one or the other.
    
    Is anyone happy with these continuing situations?  
    
    	--dan'l

    
    Not in Dallas's case! IF the whistle rules then it was ruled 
    incomplete! 
    
    
    
    Steve

Did anyone see the Giants game?

On the play where Greene sacked Simms and forced the fumble, the
TV replay showed that Simms arm was coming forward.  I mean, that's
what it looked like.  Yet they didn't call for a replay.

I've got to wonder what the criteria are for using the replay or
not.  

Personally, I'd like to see it go the way of the dinosaur, since
it really messes up the game....

I think, anyway.

'Saw

    
    From what I've seen of the college game this year, they screw up a
    fumble call on the average of about once a game.  However, they
    immediately start playing the game again, and life goes on.  Very
    rarely do you hear much whining about the calls from the coaches after
    the game, either, and there isn't the overanalysis surrounding the 
    calls, except in the most extreme of situations (see Miami-ND 1988).
    The coaches appear to have a little more tolerance towards the
    officials, who after all, are as human as the players.  I prefer it 
    much more this way...
    
    glenn
    

    Got to disagree with you on the Simms play, 'Saw.  He had started his
    arm forward, but stopped (as if to double pump), then he got hit.
    
    	--dan'l

�    Got to disagree with you on the Simms play, 'Saw.  He had started his
�    arm forward, but stopped (as if to double pump), then he got hit.

That's okay.  I was asking because I wasn't sure.  I just figured
if I wasn't sure that perhaps the refs weren't sure either.

At any rate, it didn't really affect the game....

'Saw

PS  Still don't like replay though 8^)

	I was wondering about the impact of one of those "half the distance to the
goal line" penalties on the game stats.  In the Pats gome Sunday, the Pats had
the ball on about the 6 inch line, and the Colts were penalized for offsides, or 
whatever it is they call on the defense.  Dale Arnold on the radio noted that this
amounts to about a 2 inch penalty!  How  is this accounted for in the game and team
stats?  Is a team assessed he full value of the penalty in the stats, even tho the
ball may be moved a much lesser amount?  If the stats reflect the actual amount
of the penalty when marked off on the field, how do they account for one like this,
where the actual impact is much less that 1 yard?  Do they round everything
like this up to 1 yard?

John Hendry, you make the call!

Thanks,

Mac (the NH one!)

    I made the call.  The ball was on the 1 before the penalty, the ball
    was still on the 1 after the penalty so it was a penalty for 0 yards.
    
    Any time a penalty is assessed for half the distance to the goal, the
    actual yards assessed are recorded and not what the penalty is actually
    called for.  This includes such penalties as pass interference and the
    situations where an official misspots the ball.  Also, if there's a 5
    yard penalty on the defense, for example, and the actual spot of 5
    yards would make the offense have less than a yard to go for the first
    down, it becomes a 4 yard penalty.
    
    John

John...

I am simply awed by your ability where these statistics are concerned.
You never fail to amaze me with these facts you bring up, and knowing
just how to apply what rule to the numbers that get compiled.

I never realized just how complicated this whole thing is....

Suitably impressed,
'Saw

> I am simply awed by your ability where these statistics are concerned.
> You never fail to amaze me with these facts you bring up, and knowing
> just how to apply what rule to the numbers that get compiled.
    
    He'd better, if he's the chief statistician for an NFL franchise!
    
    But I agree, it still doesn't make it any less impressive, especially 
    when you see the mass confusion that goes on with the referees down on 
    the field from time to time...
    
    John, have you ever had to do college games at all?
    
    glenn
    

    I have filled in for college games up at UMass occasionally.  The
    Sports Information Director knows where I sit (because I have season
    tickets) and I've told him I'll be glad to help out in case of any
    emergency provided that any guest I may have with me is also allowed to
    come up to the press box with me.  I don't want to make a habit of it
    though, because my football Saturdays are my football for fun, not
    work.  I work at 4 high school games every year - the Shriners All
    Star Game in June and the 3 high school Super Bowl games held at
    Foxboro in December.  The differences in rules are minor.  The big one
    is that in college and high school football, there's no such thing as a
    sack.  Yards lost attempting to pass are considered yards lost rushing
    and come off the passing total, and not the rushing total.
    
    I've found that since getting the job, I've become far more
    knowledgeable about the rules of football in general, particularly as
    they apply to penalties.  I've developed a real appreciation for just
    how good the officiating is in the NFL and have made an effort to get
    to know people like Art McNally, and ask them questions in an effort to
    learn more.  I'm looking forward to meeting Jerry Seeman in the next
    couple of years as he takes over for Art.  I don't think I'll call him
    "Smilin' Jerry", however.
    
    I've also found myself becoming far more critical of announcers and
    their lack of knowledge in the area I know best.  While I don't expect
    them to know there's no such thing, technically, as "3rd and inches"
    (it always has to be 3rd and 1), it still bugs the hell out of me when
    they do it.  Things that really bug me as well are misunderstandings of
    penalties and misunderstandings of the replay rules.  'Saw, it's kind
    of like the way Joe Theismann got under your skin about his misuse of
    rugby terms.  It's my job to know these things, it's true, but it's
    also their job to have some sort of knowledge of these things as well. 
    There's no such thing as a "half yard line" either.
    
    I like it a lot better than I would if I was working in baseball
    because I don't have to contend with players complaining about a ruling
    during a game.         
    
    John

John,

What are the mechanics of your job.  I mean, exactly how do you
go about doing it?

Do you keep track of certain things on each play, like initial spot,
final spot of the ball, what happened, turnover, tackle, sack etc,
and then go over that after the game and total all the stuff up?

Or do you have like a gigantic tote sheet that you maintain during
the game, and when the game is over you've got your totals all set?

And you mentioned 3rd and inches.  Ever since you mentioned in here
that you can't have less than a yard to go, I've noticed just how
often the announcers say "and inches"....  I think it's just because
they want to give a graphic presentation to the people.  Usually, though,
the little banner on the screen will say "3rd and 1"....

(Announcer are basically pretty much dweebs, except for a couple...)

'Saw

    I don't do this all by myself.  We have a seven person crew with each
    person having his own responsibility.  In addition, we have a computer
    system we use that we've been debugging over the past couple of years
    but which we now use both as a check and also to produce the final team
    and final individual stats.  Nothing wrong with our numbers but my
    penmanship is awful.  In addition, we have the Patriots PR staff in our
    area.  They have direct ring down phones to visiting PR, both benches,
    both locker rooms, the TV truck and the replay booth.  There are 3
    people on headsets in our area - one connected to the benches (injury
    reports and so on), one connected to the TV truck (where they also keep
    stats) and one connected to both radio stations and the scoreboard.  We
    have a separate PA system that is heard only in the press box.  The
    visiting PR people sit in the front row of the press box, we're in the
    back, the NFL Observer (who rates the officials) sits in front of us,
    we have a closed circuit TV screen at one end of our area and a VDT
    showing the running stats as generated by the computer.  The computer
    system we use is going to replaced next year by a league standard
    system that will, among other things, network the results into the
    league office and to the teams.  It will lessen our work but will mean
    changes in how we're configured and what we do.
    
    I stand for the entire game, behind the crew and between the people on
    the head sets.  My approximate position is about the north 35 yard
    line.  In front of me from left to right are the two people operating
    the computer, our crew member who does miscellaneous stats (first
    downs, third downs, penalties, kicking and fumbles), then our crew
    member doing drive charts and time of possession, (these two keep track
    of participation - starters and subs - for the visitors), then our
    play-by-play typist, then our person doing defensive stats, then our
    person doing passing/receiving/interceptions and then our person doing
    rushing (these two keep track of participation for the Patriots).  To
    his right are the internal PA announcer and the Patriots PR staff. 
    During the game, I'm charting scoring plays, field goals, time outs and
    length of the game.
    
    I try to get there 90 minutes before the game.  I go over lineups with
    the teams and help the play by play typist get them typed in.  I also
    call the weather bureau.  We type in the anticipated starting line up,
    the inactive players and anyone who we know won't play.  I call out who
    wins the toss and who will defend which goal and the typist enters it. 
    I call out who's going to kick and who's going to receive.  I call out
    who handles the ball, where it comes from, where it ends up and what
    the yardage is on the play.  On a confusing play, I sort out what
    happens but don't hesitate to ask for help where needed.  The person
    doing time can keep that on his own without help.  I leave the typist
    alone unless he gets behind.  I let our defensive guy pretty much make
    his own calls.  On scoring plays, I announce the distance and the time
    of the score and then I get the drive information from those keeping
    track of it.  I'm the final word on all calls and if someone has a
    question, I try to answer it.  That way, people are hearing "the word"
    from only one source.  The important things are to be decisive (knowing
    the rules comes into play), be fast but be accurate and be able to pay
    attention to what's going on no matter how confusing things get.  We
    can't cheer - we have to see what happened and record it.  Also after
    the 3rd quarter, I double check participation with the visiting team.
    
    At half time and after the game, we compile all the results.  Our
    typist makes the changes in participation and types in the scoring
    plays on the cover sheet.  We have everything in to be copied within 20
    minutes after the game, both because the writers are on deadline and
    because the visiting team has a plane to catch.  Then, I fill out the
    front part of the official score sheet and call it into the Elias
    Sports Bureau, the league statisticians.  This is the numbers part of
    the scoresheet and because they get it in a specific format, it's
    easier to fill it out there.  I'm usually ready to leave anywhere from
    1 hour to 1:30 after the game is over.  After getting home, I fill in
    the other half of the score sheet (lineups and scoring plays), audit
    the results and call in any corrections we may have and enter the stats
    in the cumulative totals, which I keep in parallel with the team and
    league.  On Monday, I mail the original score sheet, 2 sets of stats
    and the rosters to Elias; send a copy of the score sheet to the
    Patriots, and send a copy with cover letter (including any corrections
    we may have) to the visitors.  I get the press release from the team on
    Thursdays and I check the numbers there as well.
    
    I watch the road games when I can and get the stats from the papers the
    next day to update the cumulative stats.  The team mails me the package
    from the road game and I check it over for any glaring errors. 
    Otherwise I finish the cumulative stats, check the press release and
    get ready to do it all again.
    
    Everyone knows their job and I delegate as much as I can but I make the
    final calls.  I organize as much as I can before the season starts and
    I have a separate briefcase I have packed with everything I could
    possibly need during a game.  As long as we get things done in a hurry
    after a game (and our speed amazes some of the visiting teams) and as
    long as we get things right (if we have 1-2 corrections a year other
    than typos or participation it's a lot), things are pretty loose and
    relaxed.  I've learned to anticipate when something bad is likely to
    happen and will tell everyone to concentrate, be quiet and pay
    attention when needed.  I've also learned to be deliberately cool, in
    other words, the worse things get, the calmer I get because it keeps
    everyone else from panicking.
    
    John

Gee, sounds amazingly like what the captain of an aircraft carrier
goes through....8^)

again, impressive.

'Saw

    	John,
    
    	Standing the entire game must get tiring.
    
    	In fact, after reading 186.68, I think I'm gonna go
    	home and take a nap.
    
    	Scott

>    I've also learned to be deliberately cool, in
>    other words, the worse things get, the calmer I get because it keeps
>    everyone else from panicking.
    
    Working for the Pats, you must be pretty calm. :-)  Hope no beachballs
    make their way into the booth.
    
    When do you have time to pick up your paycheck?  
    
    	--dan'l

    I now what you mean, Scott.  I was 3rd and inches from going to the caf
    for a coffee, but I figured it's only another � yard to go......
    
    Good job, John!
    
    Hawk

    Nope, no beach balls up there.  I liken it to being an air traffic
    controller.  I'm probably the calmest person in there and the scary
    thing is, the more hectic it gets, the better I like it.  It's more fun
    when all hell's breaking loose.
    
    We get paid in a lump sum after the season which is perfect timing with
    Christmas shopping bills.
    
    John

    
    So that's it, John?  That's *All* you do?  Like, do you have to sweep
    the peanut shells outta the booth after the game too?
    
    Wow.  It does kinda sound like a combination of LLoyd Bridges' character
    in "Airplane", and Sejji Ozawa. (sp?)
    
    Dickster
    

�    Wow.  It does kinda sound like a combination of LLoyd Bridges' character
�    in "Airplane", and Sejji Ozawa. (sp?)
    

John ain't no Maytag Repairman, that's for sure!!!!

Kind of like a one armed guy trying to hang wallpaper.  (please note,
I mean nothing disparaging against people who are missing an arm...it's
a figure of speech)....    

'Saw

    
    
    I believe the proper expression is "busier than a one-armed paper
    hanger with the crabs."
    
    HTH and all that.
    

�    I believe the proper expression is "busier than a one-armed paper
�    hanger with the crabs."
    
I'll see your crabs and raise you one set of itchy hemarhoids....    


Seriously though, I'd never heard it put that way before.  Interesting
concept....

'Saw

     ...so it sounds like we cain add 'Down and Distance Police' to John's
    'Apostrophe Police' job!! Pretty busy guy, eh?
                                       Denny

Won Ton John... Stat Ninja from Hell!!!!!

Question, John

	What's the chances of the fans ever seeing the stat for 
yards lost `because' of penalties, as opposed to yards penalized.

Oftentimes in a game, you'll see a completed forty yard pass called back
because of holding... play goes over.. penalized ten yards. Then the
halfback breaks it up the middle for thirty yards; holding; play it
again... ten yards. Then the announcers will say 2 penalties for twenty
yards (which is true) but as far as I'm concerned, there've been two
penalties for ninety yards. I feel the present way of reporting penalty
yardage is very misleading as far as what `really' happened.

Mike J'N

    There is no true measure of what the "true" penalty yards really
    are, because quite often the holding is what enabled the HB to run
    30 yards.  Therefore it will never change to "true" penalties.
    
    The Wizard

    The Wizard got it right - very often, though not all the time, the
    penalty caused the gain to have happened.  It can't be consistent.
    
    What we do, however, is when we're typing the play by play, is mention
    where the ball ended up and how much the gain was for before the
    penalty was assessed.  That way, it's a complete and accurate picture
    (well, reasonably so) of what would have happened, given the above
    caveat.
    
    I would like to see stats kept on penalties called but not accepted to
    give a true picture of how much a team would have been flagged for,
    yards gained on first down plays (which the USFL used to do) and "clock
    consuming plays", ie, the qb kneeling on the ball to kill the clock
    kept separately from the rushing stats.
    
    John