PN-G bamatex

You realize that if the votes were known before the meeting ever took place, it wasn't a "right and honorable" vote, right? That's akin to saying the jury had its mind made up before the trial ever started.

I didn't accuse the other schools of voting for selfish reasons. I simply said that Coach Barrow explicitly stated that he hoped nobody would, and this indicates to me he's less likely to have done so. So many presumptions on this board.

Look, I like Coach Barrow. I'm not being critical of him here, and I agree that he's a smart guy. Which is why it doesn't surprise me that he came to the exact same conclusion I did and wasn't afraid to voice that conclusion. If you want to assume that serves some ulterior purpose, that's on you. I tend to think the guy who was openly stating he hoped the other coaches didn't vote based on selfish reasons wouldn't vote for selfish reasons.

If that was the goal, it would be rational to simply decline to comment. After all, Nederland also plays Crosby this week.

Well if you'd like, we can see what the other moderators presume.

I think there's a significant difference between respecting your opponent and stating your rationale in a decision you made, but okay.

Speaking of infractions, SETXSports Forum Rules ban profanity.

The truth, maybe? I mean, if you want to say your own head coach is lying, that's your business, but I'm going to take him at his word.

Lol.

I'm not familiar with the UIL's appeals process, but ordinary appeals processes don't allow for additional fact finding in most circumstances (i.e., if polling a juror reveals something important, like I previously indicated). I suspect all that would ordinarily be up for review is the record as it was when the vote was taken.

On the contrary, they mean everything on appeal. Just like polling jurors can make a huge difference on appeal.

If Humble ISD policy says that the umbrella isn't allowed "for rain-deflecting purposes," like the NCAA rules say video equipment isn't allowed "for coaching purposes," I might make that argument.

No, I didn’t presume anything. I'm merely pointing out that the facts that were stipulated to by all of the parties involved don't include what you're arguing. Monte Barrow, one of the fact-finders who voted on this and the head coach of PN-G's arch rival, explicitly stated that the infraction had no effect on the outcome of a close game that came down to the final possession. If the facts were such that the coach taking the pictures was using them in a way that affected the outcome of the game, he wouldn't be saying that. My guess is that this coach was taking the pictures for use after the game during weekly practices. If true, that's a violation, to be sure, but not one that affected the outcome of the Crosby game. Thus, the punishment doesn't fit the crime.

That's presumption, and it not only presumes that this coach was analyzing the pictures in that way, it also presumes he was relaying that information to the sidelines. If the facts actually indicated that, Monte Barrow wouldn't be saying this violation didn't affect the scoreboard.

Ever heard of Facebook? Androids take terrible pictures too. Didn't stop my dad from videoing me crossing the graduation stage with one, and it didn't stop grainy pictures from ending up on social media. One of our assistant principals spends the entire game uploading pictures he's taken to Facebook; in fact, when I'm not listening to the radio broadcast, I'm normally finding out what the score is through his Facebook updates. A lot of these coaches are from other parts of the state, and I know they send stuff to their families back home, too.

That I can't say. Again, I don't know what kind of enforcement powers the UIL actually does and does not have. It's possible ordering wins to be vacated is the only way they can punish a school. But if it's not, it shouldn't have been the sentence of choice here.

Bingo.

And thousands upon thousands of pictures are taken by the fans at every PN-G football game week in and week out. The mere fact pictures are being taken doesn't affect the outcome of the game. What affects the outcome of the game is if those pictures are somehow influencing coaching decisions, and there's nothing in the facts here that indicates they were. So, if the pictures didn't contribute to the win, the win shouldn't be vacated.

No, it didn't, and that's an integral part of my whole point. As I understand them, the facts are that the video was being taken during the game but wasn't being used during the game. Ergo, it had no effect on the outcome or on the Crosby players.

I already knew that, but I don't see how that affects my argument. Even if he was videoing the game, it's only a violation of the rules if he uses the video "for coaching purposes." It's entirely possible that he intended to review the film for use after the game, but there's no evidence that he did, and the facts that everyone has stipulated to, as I understand them, clearly show that the video wasn't used for any coaching purpose during the game. Ergo, the violation didn't contribute to the win that was vacated, which brings me right back to my original point: the punishment doesn't fit the crime. The kids are getting penalized for a coach's mistake they had nothing to do with. Discipline him.

No.

As I understand it, everyone has stipulated to the facts. One of PN-G's coaches had an iPad in the pressbox, which the rules clearly prohibit. That said, there is no evidence, and none of the Barbers Hill coaches have suggested, that the iPad was being used for any illicit purpose or that its presence in any way contributed to PN-G's performance in the game. I'd appeal for no other reason than that. I fail to see how the punishment fits the crime, and ultimately it's the players that are being penalized for something that they didn't do and that didn't benefit them. I'm not familiar with what enforcement powers the UIL does and doesn't have, but it seems more appropriate to hand the coach a suspension for a game or two then to totally vacate the win. Discipline the coach, don't penalize the kids.

No it doesn't. Now they're playing with a chip on their shoulder. Especially this Friday.

Every single PN-G fan needs to go buy an iPad and bring it to the Barbers Hill game with them. #FreePNG

Best of luck to Santa Fe the rest of the season. Good game, and hope y’all learned the right way to play Cherokee tonight.