No thread from Rugby this weekend?

[Easy180]

Just doesn't feel right

No comment on the OSU meltdown, but it's nice to be back on the winning side of the RRR...The huge penalties at the very worst times made for a tense game...Murray is for real and will be challenging for a Heisman in 2 years

Bradford's first OU-UT game was outstanding to say the least

I think it's safe to say Nichol is 99% gone now....Can't believe a redshirt freshman can be so cool in a game like that

Nice win Sooners...Way to bury UT's season...Sorry guys...Alamo bowl bound again Short horns

[Oh GAWD the Smell!]

lol

[Martin]

it wasn't a great looking victory, but it was a vctory.

but there was one thing about the game that i didn't get. maybe there's somebody out there that knows the rules of ncaa football better than me...

during the last minutes of play, texas has the ball and is in hurry-up offense. it's first and ten from the texas 38. texas throws a pass caught for firstdown yardage. the player is tackled. four seconds is left on the clock. however, during the play, a ref throws a flag for holding. texas is backed up ten yards from the spot of the foul. texas lines up. before the snap, the ref blows the whistle and ends the game.

what's up with that? two things seem wrong with what happened... first, a quarter can't end on a penalty. second, i thought that penalties stopped the clock. the clock shouldn't have started until the ball was snapped. it therefore seems to me that texas should've gotten to have one more play.

can anybody explain what happened or did the refs screw up? -M

(in before jokes about 'pac 10' officiating crews)

[Easy180]

mmm...I think if there is a penalty on the offense with under a minute to play there is an automatic 10 second runoff on the clock....Not exactly sure if it's a minute or two minutes, but my buddy called it before the refs

And here I thought I knew a lot more about football than he did...Kind of impressive after 8 beers or so

[Jon27]

I still wanna hear from Rugby. Looks like us OU fans DO have more class than the OSU fans. Rugby was the first one on here to start bashing the Sooners with our loss to Colorado. I don't see any threads by us OU fans immediately after the OSU T-A&M loss. Maybe I missed something? Who has more class now?

Just to sink to their level for fun.....I saw an OSU flag flying today. I couldn't help but wonder if I should get out of the car, and pull to half mast.

[Intrepid]

it wasn't a great looking victory, but it was a vctory.

but there was one thing about the game that i didn't get. maybe there's somebody out there that knows the rules of ncaa football better than me...

during the last minutes of play, texas has the ball and is in hurry-up offense. it's first and ten from the texas 38. texas throws a pass caught for firstdown yardage. the player is tackled. four seconds is left on the clock. however, during the play, a ref throws a flag for holding. texas is backed up ten yards from the spot of the foul. texas lines up. before the snap, the ref blows the whistle and ends the game.

what's up with that? two things seem wrong with what happened... first, a quarter can't end on a penalty. second, i thought that penalties stopped the clock. the clock shouldn't have started until the ball was snapped. it therefore seems to me that texas should've gotten to have one more play.

can anybody explain what happened or did the refs screw up? -M

(in before jokes about 'pac 10' officiating crews)

While listening the post game coverage on WWLS, everyone was talking about this and said that if the ball stays inbounds (on a run or a complete pass) and the offense commits a penalty (e.g. holding), the ball is set, and the clock starts. From what they said, Texas wasn't ready to snap the ball or didn't realize that the clock had started.

I tried looking on the NCAA web site to find that 10 second rule, and so far, couldn't find anything. I'm not 100% sure, but I think that's an NFL rule, and not college. I'll keep looking though.

[PUGalicious]

I still wanna hear from Rugby. Looks like us OU fans DO have more class than the OSU fans. Rugby was the first one on here to start bashing the Sooners with our loss to Colorado. I don't see any threads by us OU fans immediately after the OSU T-A&M loss. Maybe I missed something? Who has more class now?

Just to sink to their level for fun.....I saw an OSU flag flying today. I couldn't help but wonder if I should get out of the car, and pull to half mast.

Rugby doesn't have the capability to respond because he was banned from the forum, so it's not because he didn't want to.

But, no matter, you have successfully assumed his role of classless fan posting.

[Martin]

eh. i think there are plenty of classy and un-classy fans on both sides of bedlam. while i'm partial to ou (my alma mater) i'd have to say that we have our share of classless fans. i wouldn't necessarily say that on average we have more class than the average osu fan.

just to confirm, rugby is b&, which explains his lack of responses... so don't hold that against him. there's plenty of room for friendly rivalry on this site, but constantly trying to start arguments and posting things just to make people angry won't be tolerated.

as for the final play of ou/tx, i think intrepid's response makes sense. i'm not aware of a 10-second rule in college football. given that the pass was completed, the player was tackled in-bounds and that a flag was thrown for a live-ball penalty the clock starts as soon as the ball is set.

-M

[traxx]

So why is rugby banned? Just for being a total jerk and adding nothing of value to the forums. Can't say I would disagree with that. But seriously, what'd he do?

[Martin]

rugby was banned for pretty much being a total jerk. he consistently created flamebait threads and responses for no other reason than to anger other users. after repeated warnings and temporary bans, this behavior continued and in some ways worsened. thus he was deemed an unnececessary disruption to the board and was therefore banned.

-M

[Karried]

Not to mention the PM's that were received ... pretty abusive and unwarranted. There is so much more that goes on behind the scenes.

Rest assured though, for the record, banning someone is the very last thing we ever want to do.. in fact, I can count on one hand the authentic posters that have been banned over the years.

What a lot of people don't realize is that we have posters who are not authentic members (aka trolls or aliases) using mulitple accounts ( which is against the TOS and cause enormous problems). Once it is determined that numerous accounts have been created on the board, their accounts are deleted or 'banned'.

We are constantly striving to have a welcoming community here in which we can have free expression and discuss different opinions.

Any questions, feel free to send a PM to the mods ...

[FritterGirl]

So why is rugby banned? Just for being a total jerk and adding nothing of value to the forums. Can't say I would disagree with that. But seriously, what'd he do?

Hi Traxx,

Looks like KarrieD and mmm already answered your questions. I'm not a mod here, but was a long-time mod on another board until I got burned out. It's a LOT of work that general members rarely seem to recognize or understand, and you have to put up with a LOT of BS. When people are allowed to communicate via this 2-dimensionial, anonymous absurdity we call the internet, the "best" of their personalities don't always shine through. Some are emboldened by their anonymity and feel a sense of entitlement that they can get away with a lot more than they could ever get away with in RL.

The work is made even more difficult when flaming personalities are involved. And that flaming continues when said "flamer" becomes even more irritated because he/she feels his/her rights are being violated (free speech issues about) when mods attempt to correct their behavior. They become paranoid that the mods are after them personally, and they send even more inflammatory - and abusive - PMs in response. Their behavior on the board often escalates tenfold in the PMs because they feel they are being "punished."


As one of the other two noted, members in constant and flagrant violation of the rules are often warned multiple times before being banned. When I first started modding on this other board, our usership was about 2,000 people per day. Over the year+ that I modded, it grew to over 10,000 per day, and has swelled even more since then. And I only modded in 1 of about 12 individual forums. We had a "3 strikes, you're out" policy, regardless of the rule violation. Flaming was just one of the issues, and personalities like our departed rb made it even more difficult because individuals like that are typically difficult to deal with.

Banning was always a SERIOUS issue, and in most instances we mod discussed the situation at length before coming to any decision.

I would encourage everyone to worry less about why individuals were banned and give a big hug and round of applause to your hard-working, volunteer MODS.

[Karried]

wow, that is so nice of you! Thank you.

[traxx]

Hi Traxx,

Looks like KarrieD and mmm already answered your questions. I'm not a mod here, but was a long-time mod on another board until I got burned out. It's a LOT of work that general members rarely seem to recognize or understand, and you have to put up with a LOT of BS. When people are allowed to communicate via this 2-dimensionial, anonymous absurdity we call the internet, the "best" of their personalities don't always shine through. Some are emboldened by their anonymity and feel a sense of entitlement that they can get away with a lot more than they could ever get away with in RL.

The work is made even more difficult when flaming personalities are involved. And that flaming continues when said "flamer" becomes even more irritated because he/she feels his/her rights are being violated (free speech issues about) when mods attempt to correct their behavior. They become paranoid that the mods are after them personally, and they send even more inflammatory - and abusive - PMs in response. Their behavior on the board often escalates tenfold in the PMs because they feel they are being "punished."


As one of the other two noted, members in constant and flagrant violation of the rules are often warned multiple times before being banned. When I first started modding on this other board, our usership was about 2,000 people per day. Over the year+ that I modded, it grew to over 10,000 per day, and has swelled even more since then. And I only modded in 1 of about 12 individual forums. We had a "3 strikes, you're out" policy, regardless of the rule violation. Flaming was just one of the issues, and personalities like our departed rb made it even more difficult because individuals like that are typically difficult to deal with.

Banning was always a SERIOUS issue, and in most instances we mod discussed the situation at length before coming to any decision.

I would encourage everyone to worry less about why individuals were banned and give a big hug and round of applause to your hard-working, volunteer MODS.

Yeah, I imagine it would be a difficult and thankless job. I was just curious more than anything. I was never a fan of rugy from the get-go.

[Midtowner]

I agree with Parksgal.

I've been a mod for several years on a board with ~1,500,000 posts and 64,000 members, receiving I don't know how many visits per day (but our record on at one time was 1,147).

I mod a couple of forums on that board. We've had our share of 'problem children.' Larger boards like that attract a LOT of spammers. I delete several threads per day out of the forums I moderate on that board. We ban spammers on a daily basis.

As has been said here though, when it comes to banning folks for conduct issues, I can say a LOT goes into it. We have around 80 mods there and there is typically a lively debate. Generally, without consensus, no one gets banned.

I can count on one hand the number of folks we've banned for conduct issues.

That said, this is a smaller board, there are different rules, things are more personal. A flame-baiter is less likely to be lost in the shuffle. A growing board like OKCTalk has to continue to attract members -- and people who are hostile and unreasonable don't do a bit to help in that area.

[Karried]

Thanks for the input.. as per the TOS, as well as trying to take the 'high road' we shouldn't be discussing banned members so I'll close the thread.