o-line

A yellow line is a yellow line. You cannot improve your position if you go below the yellow line. Now, if you go below the yellow to avoid a wreck, that's a different circumstance altogether, just like it is when they run down pit road to avoid a wreck. But it you get caught passing, and then improving your position, by going below the yellow line, the penalty is to drop back to the end of the longest line! :thumb:

Looks about right to me, onei, and I believe the younger boys are working hard to get ready to play this fall. And, like you, I look for the juniors to make a much-needed contribution, and I think a good number of soph's may start again as well. The basketball players are getting their work in, and it shows on the court. Stephens did well as a role player last year, but I look for him to work himself back into his familiar skilled position and, if he continues to work hard enough, possibly improve on his brother's senior year stats, although a lot will depend on how hard he wants it. And Haywood, also a senior-to-be, was much improved by seasons' end as were a couple others. But I think they'll all work hard in the off-season and it will show, come spring, who has put the effort into it that it takes. And I agree we'll have to hope they get there without injuries. They will be young, I agree, for the most part. :thumb: And it's going to be here before we know it! :eek: Seems like only yesterday we were talking about how they'd do last year. :walk:

Now that's good, onei.

Sure 'nuff!

Dials played a good game! :thumb:

:lol: That's good toots! :thumb:

Well, for some reason, I started reading that last night and had a tough time initially, but finally came to the conclusion that what I believe they wanted to say either wasn't written that way or it was what was intended but it's been done wrong for so long they don't want to change it! :thumb: :sssh:

Yes, sometimes it takes me a while to spit it out! :lol: Naturally! :lol:

Sure, and the wins of the tied teams will count if used as one of the 4 defeated opponents by either of the tied teams. Otherwise, there would need to be no inclusion whatsoever to consider "games played between any two of the tied teams".

Right, and "All games played shall be counted in applying the tie-breaking procedure....", and nowhere states to omit the games won by the tied teams(except those games played between any two of the tied teams), further confirming that wins of all the tied teams will be counted, except for the wins from "those games played between any two of the tied teams". And it does make sense since any of the teams tied should be rewarded for a defeat of any of those tied. I'm still assuming that no amendments have been added to the Handbook, and/or posted on the KSHAA website.

No, toots, it says "in all games, except for the games between ANY TWO of the tied teams". Your interpretation really makes better sense, in a way, but if that was the intent it didn't make it to print that way. :thumb:

No, that's not how it reads. In D)3)b)ii), "...each game won by any four of their defeated opponents in all games, except for the games played between any two of the tied teams" count. So, obviously, since the games played between any of the tied teams is stated, the intent is to include the tied teams when counting wins for all of the tied teams, just not games played between any two of the tied teams. So I wonder if the rules have changed?

No, I don't see 2 wins by Fairland helping SC in the tie-breaker. SC already has other teams with better records.

But P-burg and Belfry both have Shelby Valley remaining on their schedules. As a matter of fact, it's the only game left for Belfry.

Thanks for saving me the time of looking up Fairland's record! :thumb:

Like I said, the rules state it's only the "games" played between the tied teams that aren't counted, so none of the wins enjoyed by either of the 3 tied teams over each other count, BUT all games are counted from any 4 defeated opponents, except for the "games" played between any of the 3 tied teams, so the other wins by a defeated opponent(even a tied opponent) count. So, since The Scribe sees it the other way, it makes me wonder if there have been changes made to the tie-breaker rules since the 2006-2007 KHSAA Handbook was issued. And I also want to look at the record of Fairland since Sheldon Clark won that game.

The Scribe doesn't see it this way, but the rules state it's only the "games" played between the tied teams that aren't counted, and all games are counted from any 4 defeated opponents, except for the "games" played between any of the 3 tied teams. So the wins from the tied teams should be a part of the tie-breaker, right? Or have there been changes made since the 2006-2007 KHSAA Handbook was issued? This makes for a significant change in the tie-breaker. :thumb:

I'm surprised that no posts have been made since my rules interpretation. But, while Shelby Valley's wins may possibly be the same for all 3 teams at the end of regular season play, SC has already played and won their game with SV which would have put them on top going into this weekend point with 11 pts. And including the wins from the tied teams makes a significant difference in the tie-breaker, and would currently show SC at 17, P-burg at 13, and Belfry at 11, but opponents games over these last 2 weeks could change things considerably. :thumb:

The Scribe posted this scenario on another thread(I did a little compilation as well and, needless to say, my numbers compiled after using "all games", as outlined below, are different, although not by a lot), but I believe Shelby Valley should have been included in the point total for Sheldon Clark as they played last week: "Point system. Going into tonight, the points were -- Belfry (10) 3 - NCC 4 - Pikeville 2 - Magoffin 1 - Lawrence/East Ridge SC (8) 3 - Boyd 3 - Knott 1 - Lawrence 1 - East Ridge P'Burg (6) 4 - Paintsville 2 - Magoffin " But the rules state it's only the "games" played between the tied teams that aren't counted, and that all games are counted from any 4 defeated opponents, except for the "games" played between any of the 3 tied teams. So the wins from the tied teams can be a part of the tie-breaker, right? :creepy: Or have there been changes made since the 2006-2007 KHSAA Handbook was issued? So, while it's still too early to know for sure who the 4 playoff teams are, we have a pretty good idea, but where they end up in the district standings may very well take until the last game of the regular season. :thumb: And my interpretation of the rulebook could be incorrect(I've been wrong before.... once! ) :fire:

Yes, that's correct. The first tie-breaker is head-to-head, which doesn't apply. The second tie-breaker states that each tied team will use any 4 teams they've defeated during the regular season, and shall be awarded one point for each game the defeated teams have won in all games, except for the games played between any two of the tied teams. All games count, even out-of-state games, and Sheldon Clark is the only team this year with an out-of-state game which they won. So whoever comes up the the tie-breaker first gets an "A+".... :thumb:

Prestonsburg, Belfry, and Sheldon Clark are in a 3-way tie atop the district since each team now has one loss. P-burg beat SC, Belfry beat P-burg, and now SC has a win over Belfry.

No, I don't imagine anyone would think of this as an upset. Prestonsburg beat a very good Sheldon Clark team that beat Belfry tonight in overtime.

Final

Well, it sounds like you'd still be a fan if Harvick and Earnhardt were struggling.....

The penalty that Nascar imposed on Mark a few years back was the 25-pt penalty for a gray area that others had been penalized for but only fined, and this ended up being more than enough pts. for him to have ended up with more than Dale had for that year. And I will agree that Mark's age has caught up to him, as does us all, but to be where he is now is a major feat not many will enjoy. And when he started with Roush, the equipment was inferior but they learned and improved, obviously. Anyone who thinks Martin is undeserving of a title is not a true Nascar fan. And he's not my favorite driver. :irked: