Coach O - When Warren left B.C., it just wasn't the same anymore. He sure was a great guy to work for. He expected coaches to take care of business and gave us total support. If we needed something, he made it happen. Not long after he left, a bunch of other coaches left, too. He's been at Dickinson since. Beau coached there for a while after playing for UT. and is now at Baylor. Not sure what Blaise is up to. Was watching a game last fall and an Aggie was going the length of the field for a touchdown but a Bear didn't give up on the play, ran him down, and knocked him out of bounds. It was Brody. Couldn't believe it. Big kid now!
Just found this article from 2009 with more.
You being a regular reader puts me up to two danged dozen! Liked the pun. I think I've heard it somewhere before, though. Oh yeah: The timers can't see the strobe! Back up, Button!
Now, back to our regularly scheduled post:
Readers would like referees at championship meets to select their meet committee early, include coaches & an athletes, and make sure everyone's well aware of who committee members are. That doesn't guarantee a referee will call the committee, but at least it won't be a mystery...
Coach O asked about coaches and our knowledge of the system/rules. Question made me ask "Why should coaches join TISCA?"
How about this:
Join TISCA now for the low, low price of just $34.99! Membership allows you to vote for District, Region, and State Coaches of the Year! You'll also be eligible to attend the TISCA clinic (for a small additional fee) in September!
Wait! There's more!
Become a TISCA member by October 1st and you'll also receive this handy 2011-12 NFHS rule book! What are you waiting for? Sign up now!!!
Just a thought, that rule book idea...
Maybe TJ will cut us a deal.
Many of us remember being told that, if there was a DQ (via dual confirmation), the system could be used to overrule and "save" the relay.
Somewhere along the line we got away from that. I looked over TISCA meeting minutes for the past 3+ years and could only find two (2) mentions of the issue. Both were in last fall's minutes.
In TISCA board meeting minutes (Friday, September 9, 2010, 7:01 - 9:03 p.m.) under Other Business:
6. Carl Auel spoke about the relay touch pads in the case of a human error; i.e. an elbow or the back instead of a hand touch.
In the TISCA general meeting minutes (Saturday, September 10, 2010, 8:34 - 10:14 a.m.) under Other Business:
Kevin Murphy asked the question about relay take-offs. Clarify the ruling and asked about possibly using a video.
Couldn't find anything more there.
Remember the warning we got before the state meet? No? Read it here.
However, it is recommended that if the equipment is used, the protocol described in Appendix B be used for the sake of consistency.
Yeah, for the sake of consistency...
We know some early take-offs in relays don't get called. Human error works both ways, right? Still, wouldn't we rather have one go uncalled - instead of having a relay incorrectly DQ'ed due to a pad malfunction?
This meeting recap from Anonymous:
At 11:41 PM, 
Anonymous said…
Anonymous said…
The Tisca Board voted to approve two recommendations to put forward to the UIL.
1. return to dual confirmation of relay exchange DQ's by humans in the -.01 to -.09 range.
2. Video review of any DQ's called by the "machine" in the -.01 to -.09 range.
The UIL, then came in to "suggest" that "we move forward" with video review, as an addition to Appendix B, "suggested" protocol for automatic relay exchange equipment.
The video equipment would be the same equipment used at the NCAA Division I Meet at UT. 100 frames per second. The NCAA rule book only recommends 25 frames per second and a very inexpensive way to set it up for review.
The video review does not need to be cost-prohibitive.
HOWEVER, the UIL proposal was very costly, as the high-level video equipment would have to be rented. Due to the cost ($8000-$10,000) it was determined by the UIL, that a large number of swimming HS's, 300 or so, should contact (by letter) the UIL, to show the UIL that this was an issue important to MANY schools, not just to a couple of schools that complained.
In addition, TISCA was tasked with getting this done in only 60 days.
It was pointed out that only about 120 schools, of the near 500 that swim in Texas, ever have representatives at the Texas State Meet. Never-the-less, the UIL feels the need to have more schools weigh-in on the need for changes to the current protocol, in order to justify the expenditure.
Politics, instead of justice and focus on the kids. A University of Texas employee, speaking on behalf of the UIL, did admit that touchpads fail and RTOP's can fail, and that there is, likely a need for an adjustment to the protocol being used and that there is room for the UIL State of Texas HS swimming to move forward to video review without breaking the NFHS rules.
We will see. No admission was made by the UIL that they made any specific mistakes at the 2011 Texas State HS Meet.
Remember, Daktronics time data acquired in an open records request, showed unequivocally, that the touchpad failed in lane 6, the Southlake Carroll Girl's 400 free relay. The entire DQ should have been thrown out. Video was not necessary to overturn the DQ, just competence by the Meet Referee and an actual review by a "real" Meet Committee.
Now, how do we go about getting over 300 schools to send letters to the UIL, saying they want video review of relay exchanges at the 2012 Texas State Swim Meet? Some of them have never even seen an RTOP, or sent a swimmer to the Texas State Meet. Many of them are uneffected and may never be effected by this problem.
That should be quite a trick. Oh, might that be the "trick" by the UIL to side-step the issue and avoid any future changes?
Stay tuned...the "fat lady has not yet started to sing and Red Auerbach has yet to light his cigar"
The TISCA General Membership Meeting in Sept 2011 should be interesting, if this does not get ironed out before then.
What? It now falls on TISCA to prove to the UIL that we should avoid using a suggested protocol that's flawed?!?! Why make the coaches spend more time jumping through hoops on this subject? We've got important Texting, Facebooking, Tweeting, and Blogging to do!
1. return to dual confirmation of relay exchange DQ's by humans in the -.01 to -.09 range.
2. Video review of any DQ's called by the "machine" in the -.01 to -.09 range.
The UIL, then came in to "suggest" that "we move forward" with video review, as an addition to Appendix B, "suggested" protocol for automatic relay exchange equipment.
The video equipment would be the same equipment used at the NCAA Division I Meet at UT. 100 frames per second. The NCAA rule book only recommends 25 frames per second and a very inexpensive way to set it up for review.
The video review does not need to be cost-prohibitive.
HOWEVER, the UIL proposal was very costly, as the high-level video equipment would have to be rented. Due to the cost ($8000-$10,000) it was determined by the UIL, that a large number of swimming HS's, 300 or so, should contact (by letter) the UIL, to show the UIL that this was an issue important to MANY schools, not just to a couple of schools that complained.
In addition, TISCA was tasked with getting this done in only 60 days.
It was pointed out that only about 120 schools, of the near 500 that swim in Texas, ever have representatives at the Texas State Meet. Never-the-less, the UIL feels the need to have more schools weigh-in on the need for changes to the current protocol, in order to justify the expenditure.
Politics, instead of justice and focus on the kids. A University of Texas employee, speaking on behalf of the UIL, did admit that touchpads fail and RTOP's can fail, and that there is, likely a need for an adjustment to the protocol being used and that there is room for the UIL State of Texas HS swimming to move forward to video review without breaking the NFHS rules.
We will see. No admission was made by the UIL that they made any specific mistakes at the 2011 Texas State HS Meet.
Remember, Daktronics time data acquired in an open records request, showed unequivocally, that the touchpad failed in lane 6, the Southlake Carroll Girl's 400 free relay. The entire DQ should have been thrown out. Video was not necessary to overturn the DQ, just competence by the Meet Referee and an actual review by a "real" Meet Committee.
Now, how do we go about getting over 300 schools to send letters to the UIL, saying they want video review of relay exchanges at the 2012 Texas State Swim Meet? Some of them have never even seen an RTOP, or sent a swimmer to the Texas State Meet. Many of them are uneffected and may never be effected by this problem.
That should be quite a trick. Oh, might that be the "trick" by the UIL to side-step the issue and avoid any future changes?
Stay tuned...the "fat lady has not yet started to sing and Red Auerbach has yet to light his cigar"
The TISCA General Membership Meeting in Sept 2011 should be interesting, if this does not get ironed out before then.
What? It now falls on TISCA to prove to the UIL that we should avoid using a suggested protocol that's flawed?!?! Why make the coaches spend more time jumping through hoops on this subject? We've got important Texting, Facebooking, Tweeting, and Blogging to do!
In related news, the Flat Earth Society is open to discussing the theory of - get this - a spherical planet! If revolutionaries can find at least three hundred astronomy teachers to weigh in on the side of a round Earth, they'll consider entertaining the possibility. If overwhelming support for the radical orbists isn't seen within sixty days, they'll continue on with business as usual.
