|
Sports » rec.sport.football.college » big ten being sued
| big ten being sued [message #1098526] |
Sun, 23 July 2006 01:47 |
|
http://cbs2chicago.com/topstories/local_story_198195814.html
Probably one of the better refs at that. Notice which school is
asserting itself as the one who controls employment.
|
|
|
| Re: big ten being sued [message #1098532 ] |
Sun, 23 July 2006 02:45 |
|
leinbacker wrote:
> http://cbs2chicago.com/topstories/local_story_198195814.html
>
> Probably one of the better refs at that. Notice which school is
> asserting itself as the one who controls employment.
I can't believe the Big 10 has let this get this far. They need to
settle or they're gonna take a huge one up the ass.
|
|
|
| Re: big ten being sued [message #1098611 ] |
Sun, 23 July 2006 15:47 |
|
leinbacker wrote:
> http://cbs2chicago.com/topstories/local_story_198195814.html
>
> Probably one of the better refs at that. Notice which school is
> asserting itself as the one who controls employment.
Load of crap, lein.
You know the story, I am sure, and to sum it up that way is just
intentionally misleading.
Someone told Carr the ref had one eye and he passed that on to the
commissioner. If he hadn't, and the story had come out, you and your
Nittany Lion buddies would be saying "Carr protects 1-eyed refs".
Vijay R.
|
|
|
| Re: big ten being sued [message #1098637 ] |
Sun, 23 July 2006 17:32 |
|
"Vijay Ramanujan" <vramanujan [at] gmail.com> wrote in
news:1153662449.237380.85840 [at] m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com:
>
> leinbacker wrote:
>> http://cbs2chicago.com/topstories/local_story_198195814.html
>>
>> Probably one of the better refs at that. Notice which school is
>> asserting itself as the one who controls employment.
>
> Load of crap, lein.
> You know the story, I am sure, and to sum it up that way is just
> intentionally misleading.
a seven game losing streak distorts the logical capabilities of the penn
state fans, of course....
--
chris
"my point? # [at] &*! you, that's my point!" -- Bucky Katt
"shut up, soapy!" -- Bucky Katt
"Matthew Hennig owes me 72 bucks." -- me
|
|
|
| Re: big ten being sued [message #1098643 ] |
Sun, 23 July 2006 17:44 |
|
Chris Mihos wrote:
> "Vijay Ramanujan" <vramanujan [at] gmail.com> wrote in
> news:1153662449.237380.85840 [at] m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com:
>
> >
> > leinbacker wrote:
> >> http://cbs2chicago.com/topstories/local_story_198195814.html
> >>
> >> Probably one of the better refs at that. Notice which school is
> >> asserting itself as the one who controls employment.
> >
> > Load of crap, lein.
> > You know the story, I am sure, and to sum it up that way is just
> > intentionally misleading.
>
> a seven game losing streak distorts the logical capabilities of the penn
> state fans, of course....
>
What's this say about Big Ten officating...
"...reviews of his work were, "on average, substantially better than
the reviews he received in the eight years preceeding the loss of his
eye."
I'll be he can even keep time.
|
|
|
| Re: big ten being sued [message #1098649 ] |
Sun, 23 July 2006 17:58 |
|
Quiet, "leinbacker" <boomer_the_cat [at] my-deja.com> -- I'm transmitting rage.
>
> Chris Mihos wrote:
>> "Vijay Ramanujan" <vramanujan [at] gmail.com> wrote in
>> news:1153662449.237380.85840 [at] m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> >
>> > leinbacker wrote:
>> >> http://cbs2chicago.com/topstories/local_story_198195814.html
>> >>
>> >> Probably one of the better refs at that. Notice which school is
>> >> asserting itself as the one who controls employment.
>> >
>> > Load of crap, lein.
>> > You know the story, I am sure, and to sum it up that way is just
>> > intentionally misleading.
>>
>> a seven game losing streak distorts the logical capabilities of the penn
>> state fans, of course....
>>
>
> What's this say about Big Ten officating...
>
> "...reviews of his work were, "on average, substantially better than
> the reviews he received in the eight years preceeding the loss of his
> eye."
>
> I'll be he can even keep time.
>
>
The irony here, of course, is that officials routinely use 2D television
replays to decide crucial plays. If that's good enough to use for instant
replay, why isn't his vision good enough for everyday calls?
--
------------------------------------------------------------ ------------
James Schrumpf http://www.hilltopper.net
Play like your couch is on fire!
|
|
|
| Re: big ten being sued [message #1098650 ] |
Sun, 23 July 2006 18:05 |
|
"leinbacker" <boomer_the_cat [at] my-deja.com> wrote in
news:1153669458.526901.44760 [at] s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
>
> Chris Mihos wrote:
>> "Vijay Ramanujan" <vramanujan [at] gmail.com> wrote in
>> news:1153662449.237380.85840 [at] m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> >
>> > leinbacker wrote:
>> >> http://cbs2chicago.com/topstories/local_story_198195814.html
>> >>
>> >> Probably one of the better refs at that. Notice which school is
>> >> asserting itself as the one who controls employment.
>> >
>> > Load of crap, lein.
>> > You know the story, I am sure, and to sum it up that way is just
>> > intentionally misleading.
>>
>> a seven game losing streak distorts the logical capabilities of the
penn
>> state fans, of course....
>>
>
> What's this say about Big Ten officating...
>
> "...reviews of his work were, "on average, substantially better than
> the reviews he received in the eight years preceeding the loss of his
> eye."
Just think how good he'd be if he lost the *other* eye, too!
--
chris
"my point? # [at] &*! you, that's my point!" -- Bucky Katt
"shut up, soapy!" -- Bucky Katt
"Matthew Hennig owes me 72 bucks." -- me
|
|
|
| Re: big ten being sued [message #1098651 ] |
Sun, 23 July 2006 18:12 |
|
James Schrumpf wrote:
> The irony here, of course, is that officials routinely use 2D television
> replays to decide crucial plays.
The kinds of plays where seeing in 2D would most affect you are often
either unreviewable or simply not reviewed. For example, whether a pass
was catchable would be a hard call without depth perception, but is
unreviewable. Where a punt out of bounds crossed the sideline, too.
Where the ball was when a runner went out of bounds.
Think back to the AFC playoffs where Champ Bailey raced 99 yards only
to lose the ball out of bounds. Or through the endzone. They reviewed
it with replay 100 times and you couldn't tell where the ball went
because a 2d replay just doesn't show you anythng.
Vijay R.
|
|
|
| Re: big ten being sued [message #1098654 ] |
Sun, 23 July 2006 18:23 |
|
Quiet, "Vijay Ramanujan" <vramanujan [at] gmail.com> -- I'm transmitting rage.
>
> James Schrumpf wrote:
>
>> The irony here, of course, is that officials routinely use 2D television
>> replays to decide crucial plays.
>
> The kinds of plays where seeing in 2D would most affect you are often
> either unreviewable or simply not reviewed. For example, whether a pass
> was catchable would be a hard call without depth perception, but is
> unreviewable. Where a punt out of bounds crossed the sideline, too.
> Where the ball was when a runner went out of bounds.
>
> Think back to the AFC playoffs where Champ Bailey raced 99 yards only
> to lose the ball out of bounds. Or through the endzone. They reviewed
> it with replay 100 times and you couldn't tell where the ball went
> because a 2d replay just doesn't show you anythng.
>
> Vijay R.
>
>
I don't see how deciding a pass is uncatchable would be hard to determine
in 2D. Depth perception isn't really needed to tell if a ball is five
yards over a player's head.
And I'm pretty sure the punt-crossing-the-sideline determination is figured
by an official standing where the ball was punted and looking out to where
the ball landed OOB, and then signaling the official running up the
sideline when he intersects that line. How else could it be done?
In any event, the telling evidence is that the guy got better evaluations
after he lost his eye than before it. Hard to argue with evidence like
that for 2D not really being required for the job.
--
------------------------------------------------------------ ------------
James Schrumpf http://www.hilltopper.net
Play like your couch is on fire!
|
|
|
| Re: big ten being sued [message #1098656 ] |
Sun, 23 July 2006 18:44 |
|
deemsbill [at] aol.com wrote:
> leinbacker wrote:
>
>> http://cbs2chicago.com/topstories/local_story_198195814.html
>>
>>Probably one of the better refs at that. Notice which school is
>>asserting itself as the one who controls employment.
>
>
> I can't believe the Big 10 has let this get this far. They need to
> settle or they're gonna take a huge one up the ass.
*ANYTHING* for LLloyd.
--
Yrs.,
Ike
********************************************************
"Race car driving is a little like sex: all men think
they're good at it. When you are out there by
yourself, you actually are good at it - until somebody
else comes on the track,'' - Jay Leno
********************************************************
http://www.frappr.com/rsfckers
|
|
|
| Re: big ten being sued [message #1098657 ] |
Sun, 23 July 2006 18:51 |
|
Vijay Ramanujan wrote:
> leinbacker wrote:
>
>> http://cbs2chicago.com/topstories/local_story_198195814.html
>>
>>Probably one of the better refs at that. Notice which school is
>>asserting itself as the one who controls employment.
>
>
> Load of crap, lein.
> You know the story, I am sure, and to sum it up that way is just
> intentionally misleading.
>
> Someone told Carr the ref had one eye and he passed that on to the
> commissioner.
In the course of his daily "What can the BIG TEN do for scUM today" report, I'm
sure. Did "someone" also tell Llloyd of this Ref's excellent performace ratings?
This one REALLY stinks.
--
Yrs.,
Ike
********************************************************
"Race car driving is a little like sex: all men think
they're good at it. When you are out there by
yourself, you actually are good at it - until somebody
else comes on the track,'' - Jay Leno
********************************************************
http://www.frappr.com/rsfckers
|
|
|
| Re: big ten being sued [message #1098659 ] |
Sun, 23 July 2006 18:54 |
|
Chris Mihos wrote:
> "leinbacker" <boomer_the_cat [at] my-deja.com> wrote in
> news:1153669458.526901.44760 [at] s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
>
>
>>Chris Mihos wrote:
>>
>>>"Vijay Ramanujan" <vramanujan [at] gmail.com> wrote in
>>>news:1153662449.237380.85840 [at] m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com:
>>>
>>>
>>>>leinbacker wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> http://cbs2chicago.com/topstories/local_story_198195814.html
>>>>>
>>>>>Probably one of the better refs at that. Notice which school is
>>>>>asserting itself as the one who controls employment.
>>>>
>>>>Load of crap, lein.
>>>>You know the story, I am sure, and to sum it up that way is just
>>>>intentionally misleading.
>>>
>>>a seven game losing streak distorts the logical capabilities of the
>
> penn
>
>>>state fans, of course....
>>>
>>
>>What's this say about Big Ten officating...
>>
>>"...reviews of his work were, "on average, substantially better than
>>the reviews he received in the eight years preceeding the loss of his
>>eye."
>
>
> Just think how good he'd be if he lost the *other* eye, too!
>
He'd be promoted to the Replay crew.
--
Yrs.,
Ike
********************************************************
"Race car driving is a little like sex: all men think
they're good at it. When you are out there by
yourself, you actually are good at it - until somebody
else comes on the track,'' - Jay Leno
********************************************************
http://www.frappr.com/rsfckers
|
|
|
| Re: big ten being sued [message #1098660 ] |
Sun, 23 July 2006 18:57 |
|
leinbacker wrote:
> Chris Mihos wrote:
>
>>"Vijay Ramanujan" <vramanujan [at] gmail.com> wrote in
>>news:1153662449.237380.85840 [at] m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com:
>>
>>
>>>leinbacker wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://cbs2chicago.com/topstories/local_story_198195814.html
>>>>
>>>>Probably one of the better refs at that. Notice which school is
>>>>asserting itself as the one who controls employment.
>>>
>>>Load of crap, lein.
>>>You know the story, I am sure, and to sum it up that way is just
>>>intentionally misleading.
>>
>>a seven game losing streak distorts the logical capabilities of the penn
>>state fans, of course....
>>
>
>
> What's this say about Big Ten officating...
>
> "...reviews of his work were, "on average, substantially better than
> the reviews he received in the eight years preceeding the loss of his
> eye."
>
> I'll be he can even keep time.
>
And knows that "the heel" is part of "the foot".
--
Yrs.,
Ike
********************************************************
"Race car driving is a little like sex: all men think
they're good at it. When you are out there by
yourself, you actually are good at it - until somebody
else comes on the track,'' - Jay Leno
********************************************************
http://www.frappr.com/rsfckers
|
|
|
| Re: big ten being sued [message #1098704 ] |
Sun, 23 July 2006 21:06 |
|
James Schrumpf wrote:
> I don't see how deciding a pass is uncatchable would be hard to determine
> in 2D. Depth perception isn't really needed to tell if a ball is five
> yards over a player's head.
I may have stated that badly. Take a situation where a pass is thrown
behind a receiver on a cross route. He reaches back as a defender hits
him and the ball goes by. If the pass had cleared the receiver already,
you say he couldn't have caught it, no PI. If the pass hadn't cleared
the receiver, you say the DB has to give him a chance and it's PI. If
you have no depth perception, it's hard to tell.
> In any event, the telling evidence is that the guy got better evaluations
> after he lost his eye than before it. Hard to argue with evidence like
> that for 2D not really being required for the job.
Only if assume it's an absolute and that evaluations are well done. If
there's a 50% chance that a one-eyed official is going to have
problems, then 50% of the cases are going to show no evidence of
detriment. Does that mean it doesn't exist?
The Big 10 has to have a rule on vision tests and impairment. If they
do, the ref getting fired makes sense regardless of evaluation because
he doesn't pass the impairment test. If they don't, it's ludicrous and
they should implement one.
Vijay R.
|
|
|
| Re: big ten being sued [message #1098705 ] |
Sun, 23 July 2006 21:08 |
|
Ike wrote:
> In the course of his daily "What can the BIG TEN do for scUM today" report, I'm
> sure. Did "someone" also tell Llloyd of this Ref's excellent performace ratings?
>
> This one REALLY stinks.
Penn State fans are being hypocritical on this. When Joe Pa complained
and complained and we got replay, it was "Yay, Big 10 is listening. Why
did it take Joe Pa's complaints?" When Carr passes on info about a
1-eyed ref, it's "Why does Lloyd Carr have such influence."
At this point, any story that contains the words "ref" and "Carr" is
proof in Penn State land that something stinks.
Vijay R.
|
|
|
| Re: big ten being sued [message #1098712 ] |
Sun, 23 July 2006 21:22 |
|
Vijay Ramanujan wrote:
> Ike wrote:
>
>
>>In the course of his daily "What can the BIG TEN do for scUM today" report, I'm
>>sure. Did "someone" also tell Llloyd of this Ref's excellent performace ratings?
>>
>>This one REALLY stinks.
>
>
> Penn State fans are being hypocritical on this. When Joe Pa complained
> and complained and we got replay, it was "Yay, Big 10 is listening. Why
> did it take Joe Pa's complaints?" When Carr passes on info about a
> 1-eyed ref, it's "Why does Lloyd Carr have such influence."
>
> At this point, any story that contains the words "ref" and "Carr" is
> proof in Penn State land that something stinks.
>
> Vijay R.
>
What really pissed me off is that time that Lloyd Carr chased down and
grabbed a referee after the game was over, and then hung a referee doll
on the door of his house in effigy.
--
chris
"my point? # [at] &*! you, that's my point." -- Bucky Katt
"shut up, soapy!" -- Bucky Katt
"Matthew Hennig owes me 72 bucks" -- me
|
|
|
| Re: big ten being sued [message #1098722 ] |
Sun, 23 July 2006 21:31 |
|
Quiet, "Vijay Ramanujan" <vramanujan [at] gmail.com> -- I'm transmitting
rage.
>
> James Schrumpf wrote:
>
>> I don't see how deciding a pass is uncatchable would be hard to
>> determine in 2D. Depth perception isn't really needed to tell if a
>> ball is five yards over a player's head.
>
> I may have stated that badly. Take a situation where a pass is thrown
> behind a receiver on a cross route. He reaches back as a defender hits
> him and the ball goes by. If the pass had cleared the receiver
> already, you say he couldn't have caught it, no PI. If the pass hadn't
> cleared the receiver, you say the DB has to give him a chance and it's
> PI. If you have no depth perception, it's hard to tell.
I don't think that's a good example. The ball has to be _uncatchable_,
not "past the receiver when he gets hit". In your scenario, a receiver
could alligator-arm a pass and not get the flag, which would be unlikely.
>
>> In any event, the telling evidence is that the guy got better
>> evaluations after he lost his eye than before it. Hard to argue with
>> evidence like that for 2D not really being required for the job.
>
> Only if assume it's an absolute and that evaluations are well done. If
> there's a 50% chance that a one-eyed official is going to have
> problems, then 50% of the cases are going to show no evidence of
> detriment. Does that mean it doesn't exist?
I don't follow you. He said he got _better_ evaluations _after_ the
accident.
>
> The Big 10 has to have a rule on vision tests and impairment. If they
> do, the ref getting fired makes sense regardless of evaluation because
> he doesn't pass the impairment test. If they don't, it's ludicrous and
> they should implement one.
It seems obvious they don't have a vision test; it'd be hard to not
notice a one-eyed ref if they did.
I do sympathize with the conference: who wants to have a one-eyed ref?
What a fertile ground for jokes, regardless of his abilities. They could
have handled it better, however.
--
------------------------------------------------------------ ------------
James Schrumpf http://www.hilltopper.net
Play like your couch is on fire!
|
|
|
| Re: big ten being sued [message #1098730 ] |
Sun, 23 July 2006 22:07 |
|
James Schrumpf wrote:
> I don't think that's a good example. The ball has to be _uncatchable_,
> not "past the receiver when he gets hit". In your scenario, a receiver
> could alligator-arm a pass and not get the flag, which would be unlikely.
Once it's passed the WR it's not catchable anymore. You won't see many
PIs called on plays where the WR misses the ball unimpeded and then was
hit.
> I don't follow you. He said he got _better_ evaluations _after_ the
> accident.
Multiple different questions here:
1. Is it fair to have a rule that one-eyed refs can't get jobs in the
Big 10?
I think yes, absolutely that's fair. Maybe there are some refs who do
fine with one eye, but it's not a risk worth taking.
2. Why did his evaluations get better?
Who cares? No one's ever trusted or cared about the Big 10's
evaluations of its own refs before. The Big 10 has made a habit out of
apologizing to teams. I've seen games where officials attempted to use
rules that were NFL only rules, only to have a coach talk them out of
it. Why now do we suddenly assume that if a Big 10 official got a good
evaluation that's proof that he was good?
And before any argument distorting Lions get in here, no one's ever
argued that the Big 10 officials were great, only that there
incompetence was not biased against or for one team.
> It seems obvious they don't have a vision test; it'd be hard to not
> notice a one-eyed ref if they did.
Is it? I had pretty bad double vision and the vision tests never
spotted it. The standard vision test is just an eye chart, not
something which would test depth perception. I would think you'd want
to test peripheral vision, but apparently they don't.
> I do sympathize with the conference: who wants to have a one-eyed ref?
> What a fertile ground for jokes, regardless of his abilities. They could
> have handled it better, however.
Completely agree, except that we don't know how they handled it. All we
know is that Filson was fired a year ago, it's just hitting the news
and the Big 10 won't comment because of the pending lawsuit.
But what I find absolutely idiotioc / insane is the PSU fans in this
forum trying to paint this is as somehow evidence of pro-Michigan
corruption inside the Big 10. Ya, they fired a 1-eyed ref because lord
knows if it weren't for Michigan, 1-eyed refs would be all the rage in
college football.
Vijay R.
|
|
|
| Re: big ten being sued [message #1098731 ] |
Sun, 23 July 2006 22:10 |
|
Ike wrote:
> And knows that "the heel" is part of "the foot".
I like when the self-appointed guru of BWI (Marsh) posted to that forum
that he had spoken with an NCAA ref and had been informed that the call
was correct (it was complete), but then proceded to still add it to his
list of evidence that the officials are biased in favor of Michigan.
How dare they make confusing, controversial but ultimately correct
calls that favor Michigan?!?!
Vijay R.
|
|
|
| Re: big ten being sued [message #1098733 ] |
Sun, 23 July 2006 22:23 |
|
Vijay Ramanujan wrote:
> Ike wrote:
>
>> And knows that "the heel" is part of "the foot".
>
> I like when the self-appointed guru of BWI (Marsh) posted to that forum
> that he had spoken with an NCAA ref and had been informed that the call
> was correct (it was complete), but then proceded to still add it to his
> list of evidence that the officials are biased in favor of Michigan.
>
> How dare they make confusing, controversial but ultimately correct
> calls that favor Michigan?!?!
Oh, come on. You're getting almost as bad as the homerkooks.
If they make the right call by suspicious accident (the right call being
absolutely impossible to make from their line-of-sight, for instance)
because they're trying desperately to make the pro-Michigan call, they
could have arrived at the right result by the wrong path.
Not that that's what happened. But hell, it could have.
--
Mike Dahmus
http://mdahmus.monkeysystems.com/blog/
|
|
|
| Re: big ten being sued [message #1098738 ] |
Sun, 23 July 2006 22:45 |
|
Quiet, "Vijay Ramanujan" <vramanujan [at] gmail.com> -- I'm transmitting
rage.
>
> James Schrumpf wrote:
>> I don't think that's a good example. The ball has to be
>> _uncatchable_, not "past the receiver when he gets hit". In your
>> scenario, a receiver could alligator-arm a pass and not get the flag,
>> which would be unlikely.
>
> Once it's passed the WR it's not catchable anymore. You won't see many
> PIs called on plays where the WR misses the ball unimpeded and then
> was hit.
Yes, but that's not the same as "uncatchable." I guess you didn't really
mean "uncatchable", it was just a bad choice of word. I get your point
now, though.
>
>> I don't follow you. He said he got _better_ evaluations _after_ the
>> accident.
>
> Multiple different questions here:
> 1. Is it fair to have a rule that one-eyed refs can't get jobs in the
> Big 10?
> I think yes, absolutely that's fair. Maybe there are some refs who do
> fine with one eye, but it's not a risk worth taking.
> 2. Why did his evaluations get better?
> Who cares? No one's ever trusted or cared about the Big 10's
> evaluations of its own refs before. The Big 10 has made a habit out of
> apologizing to teams. I've seen games where officials attempted to use
> rules that were NFL only rules, only to have a coach talk them out of
> it. Why now do we suddenly assume that if a Big 10 official got a good
> evaluation that's proof that he was good?
>
> And before any argument distorting Lions get in here, no one's ever
> argued that the Big 10 officials were great, only that there
> incompetence was not biased against or for one team.
>
>> It seems obvious they don't have a vision test; it'd be hard to not
>> notice a one-eyed ref if they did.
>
> Is it? I had pretty bad double vision and the vision tests never
> spotted it. The standard vision test is just an eye chart, not
> something which would test depth perception. I would think you'd want
> to test peripheral vision, but apparently they don't.
Good gracious, he had a _prosthetic eye_. It's one thing to miss double
vision, surely another to not notice one's missing an eye.
>
>> I do sympathize with the conference: who wants to have a one-eyed
>> ref? What a fertile ground for jokes, regardless of his abilities.
>> They could have handled it better, however.
>
> Completely agree, except that we don't know how they handled it. All
> we know is that Filson was fired a year ago, it's just hitting the
> news and the Big 10 won't comment because of the pending lawsuit.
>
> But what I find absolutely idiotioc / insane is the PSU fans in this
> forum trying to paint this is as somehow evidence of pro-Michigan
> corruption inside the Big 10. Ya, they fired a 1-eyed ref because lord
> knows if it weren't for Michigan, 1-eyed refs would be all the rage in
> college football.
>
> Vijay R.
>
>
Well, they _are_ the Aggeez of the Big Televen, aren't they?
--
------------------------------------------------------------ ------------
James Schrumpf http://www.hilltopper.net
Play like your couch is on fire!
|
|
|
Gehe zu:
aktuelle Zeit: Wed Nov 19 22:45:32 CET 2008
Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0.16171 Sekunden |
