A new meaning for "Republican"

[Charles Doyle]

Right. I misread the commentator's remarks.

Occasionally in recent years, it's been proposed for basketball to adopt an "advantage" rule similar to the one in soccer: If the calling of a foul would benefit the team committing the foul, then the referee must refrain from calling the foul.  The problem is the impossibility of the referee's foreseeing the outcome--as in the instance being discussed.

--Charlie
__________________________________________________________

---- Original message ----
>Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 21:04:55 -0400
>From: Laurence Horn <laurence.horn at YALE.EDU>
>Subject: Re: A new meaning for "Republican"
>To: ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
>
>---------------------- Information from the mail header -----------------------
>Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
>Poster:       Laurence Horn <laurence.horn at YALE.EDU>
>Subject:      Re: A new meaning for "Republican"
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>At 3:22 PM -0400 3/23/07, Charles Doyle wrote:
>>Besides, a foul to prevent a 3-point shot would have to cause worry
>>about a bad bounce on the missed THIRD free throw.
>>
>>--Charlie
>
>I beg to differ.  The intentional fouls in such situations are always
>given (or at least always tried to be given) *before* the
>three-pointer is hoisted up, so the team that's down by 3 is awarded
>only a two-shot foul.  The main danger, as the anti-hacker coach
>recognizes, is that the guy who's fouled makes the first shot, misses
>the second intentionally, his team gets the rebound (the "bad-bounce"
>scenario) and puts it up for the tie.  The second, less likely danger
>is that the foul *will* be called in the act of shooting and the guy
>who's fouled makes all three shots--he wouldn't try to miss the third
>if he makes the first two.  If the Xavier coach last week had been
>less conservative (and more sensible), he'd have had one of his
>players foul the Ohio State guy Lewis before he put up the
>three-point shot and they'd have pulled off the big upset (barring
>one of the above scenarios, of course).
>
>LH
>
>
>>__________________________________________________________
>>
>>---- Original message ----
>>>Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 14:12:58 -0400
>>>From: "Landau, James" <James.Landau at NGC.COM>
>>>Subject: A new meaning for "Republican"
>>
>>>
>>>http://www.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1601906,00.html
>>><quote>
>>><snip>a coach's job is also to give his team the best shot of
>>>winning, and especially in the college game, that means fouling to
>>>prevent a last-second three-point attempt.
>>
>>>Still, it's amazing how many coaches just won't buy it. Another
>>>anti-hacker is Bucknell coach Pat Flannery, whose teams upset
>>>Kansas and Arkansas, respectively, in the '05 and '06 tournaments.
>>>He trains his defense to trap the good shooters, and doesn't want
>>>to risk a bad bounce on the second foul shot . . . .
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------
>>The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>
>------------------------------------------------------------
>The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org