uknowit2

Buy a rule book.

The way I understand the old rule, when the 12+ men in the huddle was put into place was to keep the offense from trying to decive the defense. Like having 3 wide outs and 2 tight ends in the huddle and at the last moment taking the tight ends out. The defense couldn't adjust from run to pass. At that time it was an automatic illegal procedure. Now it's only a procedure call if a play is run. Hense the time out means there was no attempt to decive and no foul.

Time out was called before the play clock ran down. Therefore, no penalty. Your welcome. If you have anymore questions feel free to ask.

I'll try and help you out football wiz. If a player on the receiving team calls for a fair catch then the ball is dead no matter who catches it. They made the correct call. Timeout was called to the field judge right before the line judge threw the flag from the other side of the field. Again, correct call.

Central @ [b]PA Memorial[/b] Ozen @ [b]Westbrook[/b] Gregory Portland @ [b]Port Neches Groves[/b] [b]Jasper[/b] @ Lumberton [b]Silsbee[/b] @ Houston Waltrip Vidor @ [b]Texas High[/b] West Orange Stark @ [b]Nederland[/b] [b]Dayton[/b] @ Fort Bend Elkins Santa Fe @ [b]Barbers Hill[/b] Hamshire Fannett @ [b]Splendora[/b] [b]Hardin Jefferson[/b] @ Huffman Kirbyville @ [b]Coldspring[/b] [b]Liberty[/b] @ Hardin Orangefield @ [b]East Chambers[/b] Shepherd @ [b]Bridge City[/b] Houston Kinkaid @ [b]Anahuac[/b] [b]Kountze[/b] @ Hull Daisetta Sabine Pass @ [b]Deweyville[/b] [b]Warren[/b] @ West Hardin Woodville @ [b]Corrigan Camden[/b]

[quote name="Football Freak" post="800397" timestamp="1273587493"] Hey [i]uknow[/i]-a whole lotta nothing... How about supporting a school instead of bashing on it. I saw you at a few Hardin games and you didn't have anything to gripe and complain about then...? Wonder why that is?    ??? By the way, what school is your boy playing at these days?  [/quote] Freak, I think you may have me confussed with someone else. As for Hardin, good luck this season...you're going to need it. (technically, that's not bashing)

The"House of Pain"? It certainly is for the home crowd.

It is at Hardin.

The thing you'll notice about Hardin posters is they are delusional, no matter what the sport. They lose by 13 and claim victory because they didn't lose by 27. They lose because their best players are hurt or the refs are bad. The funniest thing about Hardin is the jealousy of EC's all round success in sports. You can see it all year starting in football. They build themselves up with unrealistic expectations and fall flat on their faces. It's like clockwork. And Woodville will roll Hardin big time, if they even make it to the 2nd round.

Well there you go, another 'dominating' victory! I think Hardin has 4th place wrapped up. What a tradition...

What are you implying? EC wasn't being friendly when the smashed on Hardin by 36 Tuesday night?

Another 'dominating' performance by Hardin.

[quote name="Da Boss" post="749216" timestamp="1264427674"] We all know that the refs n EC are going to be horrible, but since hardin has the starters back i do think that they can beat the players and the refs. What do you think? [/quote] It's always good to be proactive and have your excuses ready before the game. "We all know that the refs n EC are going to be horrible" why, are they coming from Hardin?

No, like they showed up at Hardin in December. And every other time they played as far as I can remember.

I would have said 50 but I get your point.

You have to be good to beat Kountze. All they have to do is show up to beat Hardin.

Of course he's the best. He's from Hardin, they always have the best players in all sports. That's why they're so successful.

Should I go back and repost it or would you  perfer I just drop it?

Lets see, the second half of district starts next week. According to your (baseball25) previous prediction this is the time Hardin is going to 'dominate' the district. Correct?

Didn't Hardin loss to a JV team a week or so ago?

[quote name="bballgod" post="734622" timestamp="1261617628"] The fact that he was in the game prior to the timeout has nothing to do with it.  He was not on the floor when the ball was put in play.  He is the player that ran onto the floor when the coach yelled.  He did not dive into the stands and have some nachos and come back into the play.  He sat on the bench and ran onto the floor when OF was about to shoot a lay-up.  It really isn't a big deal.  It just amazes me that you will justify something that should have been so simple as calling a technical.  Yeah they messed up with other calls.  None of them changed the outcome of the game.  EC played better than us.  We shot like crap and lost.  That is the bottom line.  In this situation the officials messed up and it really was a situation where they could have gotten it right.  They talked about it for awhile before coming to a decision.   [/quote] bballgod...you've been demoted for not knowing the rules. You're no longer a god. [i]"The fact that he was in the game prior to the timeout has nothing to do with it". [/i] That has everything to do with it. If the refs stopped play when the young man ran on the court, that's his bad. He should have noted only 4 players and expected the coach to see that too. I can understand him blowing the play dead, seeing someone running on the court and all but he should have let play continue until there was a whistle, then check the book to make sure he player was ok to participate. If he was on the books, no harm no foul. If not, it's a tech.

[quote name="True Blue" post="734612" timestamp="1261615330"] That is pretty much how it went . There was a player from EC at the table to check in when the timeout was called. After the timeout the player that was checking in plus three other players went on the floor. The ball was thrown in by OF at ECs end the ball was then at the OF end when  the player from EC, that was in before the time out, ran on the floor. There was not a SUBSTITUTION He WAS ON the floor before the timeout he just forgot to go in ??? The refs should have counted players before the play begain and pointed out that EC did not have enough. [/quote] Sorry, It's not the responsibilty of the ref to stop play because a team only had 4 players on the floor. He should make sure there are not more than 5 players. Other than that the player that was already on the books was Ok to re-enter without checking in.

I think you're confusing a substitution with a player that is already in the game. The ref has the final say when a sub enters but if the 5th player was already in the game, than that's not a substitution. He can play where ever he wants, including the bench. An example would be a player going into the stands (chasing a loose ball) and doesn't return for 10 seconds. Play continues and no one 'waves' them in.

Question. Was the player that came off the bench late already in the game before the time out? If so, there was no need to check in with the scorekeeper. A player can sit in the upper deck if he wants to as long as there is no more that 5 players in the game on the books.

Sure they will. Just like football.