Looking for practice material?

Find thousands of archived packets FREE for study/practice use at the Quizbowl Packet Archive!Announced tournament dates

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Discussion of quizbowl topics not related to specific tournaments
User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO
Contact:

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by Charlie Dees » Fri Oct 06, 2006 10:57 am

ooh!

S.C.Mitchell07
Posts: 504
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 12:00 am
Location: Drury (Springfield)
Contact:

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by S.C.Mitchell07 » Fri Oct 06, 2006 2:32 pm

East Buc & UMR wrote: College loosese alot of people up...mostly girls
"How come every time you come around.."

George Clooney
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 11:00 pm

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by George Clooney » Mon Oct 09, 2006 9:56 pm

Whatev.

User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO
Contact:

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by Charlie Dees » Wed Oct 25, 2006 3:19 pm

Okay just something else that proves how inefficient MSHSAA is.
Why do they require a rules meeting for all teams in the state so early in the year. It seems like half of the coaches don't know if they're registering for districts until partway through the year, and what about teams that may start up partway through the year. Unless there's more to the story, it seems like any logical person would require a meeting after a team registers for districts so everyone knows what to do. Just a thought, but anything involving scholar bowl is near the bottom of their priorities.

STPickrell
Posts: 433
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 12:00 am
Location: Vienna, VA
Contact:

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by STPickrell » Wed Oct 25, 2006 4:21 pm

ashkenaziCD wrote: Okay just something else that proves how inefficient MSHSAA is.
Why do they require a rules meeting for all teams in the state so early in the year. It seems like half of the coaches don't know if they're registering for districts until partway through the year, and what about teams that may start up partway through the year. Unless there's more to the story, it seems like any logical person would require a meeting after a team registers for districts so everyone knows what to do. Just a thought, but anything involving scholar bowl is near the bottom of their priorities.
Seems to me it'd make sense to have a rules-type meeting a few weeks before Districts, when everything is finalized. Also I'm not sure why returning coaches would need to go to said meetings ...

User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO
Contact:

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by Charlie Dees » Thu Oct 26, 2006 10:58 am

The reason why there are rules meetings (from what I can tell) is because there were some incorrectly handled protests and vague rules last year at state. I know because I saw three of them happen.
Example: This one's going to become infamous. Liberty v. Ladue at state last year. In the middle of the match the moderator made Liberty's captain change seats because she didn't like where he was sitting (there may/may not have been a rule, I really don't know, but honestly that was why she did it). I really can't imagine that there actually was a rule about that.

johnboy81918
Posts: 394
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 12:00 am

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by johnboy81918 » Thu Oct 26, 2006 12:50 pm

Maybe if Liberty's captain wasn't such a -------, he wouldn't have been asked to move. Didn't anyone offer to shoot him in the head a few times?

User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO
Contact:

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by Charlie Dees » Thu Oct 26, 2006 1:09 pm

My impression was just that the moderator was a hardcore beezy. But I don't actually know her (I think someone told me that they knew her and that she was a beezy, but I don't remember who).

User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO
Contact:

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by Charlie Dees » Thu Oct 26, 2006 1:11 pm

johnboy81918 wrote: Maybe if Liberty's captain wasn't such a -------, he wouldn't have been asked to move. Didn't anyone offer to shoot him in the head a few times?
And anyone who sees that NKC captain can just tell he's just a total d-bag. I mean, look at that language he uses! Not to mention he sounds gay.

FZW Coach
Posts: 874
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 12:00 am

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by FZW Coach » Fri Oct 27, 2006 4:02 am

STPickrell wrote:
ashkenaziCD wrote: Okay just something else that proves how inefficient MSHSAA is.
Why do they require a rules meeting for all teams in the state so early in the year. It seems like half of the coaches don't know if they're registering for districts until partway through the year, and what about teams that may start up partway through the year. Unless there's more to the story, it seems like any logical person would require a meeting after a team registers for districts so everyone knows what to do. Just a thought, but anything involving scholar bowl is near the bottom of their priorities.
Seems to me it'd make sense to have a rules-type meeting a few weeks before Districts, when everything is finalized. Also I'm not sure why returning coaches would need to go to said meetings ...
Why would returning coaches have to attend a rules meeting once every two years? Yeah, seems crazy, heh?



HOWEVER . . . .



Do teams even know the rules? . . . . . um, it turns out not so much.

We had a situation at state last year (Round 1 vs. Ladue) where they interrupted a mathematics calculation question. We were given 5 seconds on the rebound. That seems crazy. Or is it logical? According to the manual, we were to be given 15 seconds on an interrupted calculation question. I quickly raised my hands and said that we should have been given 15 seconds hoping they would quickly fix the problem and give my side a few more seconds before calling time. However, they did not.

Technically, . . . . I violated the rules. It is the responsibility of the captain to protest a rule infringement such as that.

HOWEVER,


the moderator posts on this board and has been involved in this sport over 10 years. He went to whoever was in charge of the state tournament and they agreed with his decision (saying that 15 seconds was not the correct call). The timer has been involved in this sport for who knows how many years.


I raised this question at the Advisory Board Meeting in Columbia last May 31. What do you think happened? The room was split. No one had a sure fire answer. We read the rule, re-read, digested it, and finally all agreed with me.


So, yeah, . . . . why would coaches EVER have to attend? I am glad someone raised the issue.


Oh yeah . . . . why would teams every want to know what is going during the season before the final games (Districts)? Hmmm . . . . maybe we can run tournaments more correctly during the year and thus make Districts and State more effective. Yeah, who would want that?!!!!


Oh yeah, I forgot, . . . . some of you are still used to using worksheets and such in your games. No wonder you would complain about a Rules Meeting trying to show coaches the correct way the games are to be played!!!

User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO
Contact:

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by Charlie Dees » Fri Oct 27, 2006 7:15 am

What does worksheet play have to do with rules meetings?

Worksheets are a perfectly legitimate variation on regular MSHSAA rules that lots of tournaments use in their formats.

FZW Coach
Posts: 874
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 12:00 am

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by FZW Coach » Fri Oct 27, 2006 9:11 am

ashkenaziCD wrote: What does worksheet play have to do with rules meetings?

Worksheets are a perfectly legitimate variation on regular MSHSAA rules that lots of tournaments use in their formats.
Worksheets are fine for tournaments.

Different formats are fine for tournaments, but what is wrong with a rules meeting to make sure everyone knows the format that will be used during Districts?

And what is wrong with running other tournaments with the same format?

All in all, I think having a Rules Meeting is very legitimate. And I also think having it at the beginning of the year makes sense.

User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO
Contact:

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by Charlie Dees » Fri Oct 27, 2006 10:16 am

Question: Did I once attack the idea of a rules meeting?
Answer: No.

Q: Did I actually defend the idea of a rules meeting?
A: Yes. I said I could see why they needed it.

Q: Did I personally watch your team's protest be incorrectly handled?
A: Yes, and I was chomping at the bit to say something defending you, but I wasn't actively participating so I kept my mouth quiet.

Here is where my argument comes is:
The rules meetings should be held after districts are registered in the late winter. My reasons are:
A) Then it won't waste our time with teams who don't bother to go to districts.
B ) If a school starts up partway through the year, they can't attend the meeting (and unless I'm reading this wrong) can't attend districts.
C) For those teams who normally never play other than during districts, who have coaches that probably don't know any better about the meetings, or who don't care, then those teams are not allowed from participating in districts.

Q: Did I say that there might be more to the story that I'm not getting?
A: Yes.

All of my responses are simply based on what is the public knowledge.

East Buc & UMR
Posts: 5401
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 12:00 am
Location: Gower
Contact:

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by East Buc & UMR » Fri Oct 27, 2006 10:21 am

What happend to nice chuck??

User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO
Contact:

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by Charlie Dees » Fri Oct 27, 2006 10:23 am

International Baccalaureate work drains all emotion from your soul!!!

I'm in my lawyer mode that I got from my dad.

STPickrell
Posts: 433
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 12:00 am
Location: Vienna, VA
Contact:

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by STPickrell » Sat Oct 28, 2006 8:31 am

FZW Coach wrote: Oh yeah . . . . why would teams every want to know what is going during the season before the final games (Districts)? Hmmm . . . . maybe we can run tournaments more correctly during the year and thus make Districts and State more effective. Yeah, who would want that?!!!!
If there are problems with too many "dialects" of the game being played then returning coaches would need to go to the rules meetings.

However, with that said is there a reason there couldn't be early season rules meetings and then a second set of meetings after registration is finalised? This way if a team starts at mid-season or for whatever reason doesn't get its act together until then, then they can still go to Districts.

In VA, there are 4-8 rules clinics held around the state for each of the brainpower sports (Scholastic Bowl, debate, forensics and drama). Each rules clinic has the VHSL director in charge of the brainpower sports and one of the Advisory Committee members. There's a general invitation for me to attend them as well although I am in Northern Virginia (near DC) and so attending the ones in Southwestern Virginia (near Knoxville) would be problematic as it is a 6-hour drive.

SB only requires first-year coaches to attend as the rules don't change as much year to year as in the others. We've had some troubles over the years with regional dialects being played. From time to time I've had to make interpretations of the rules in the VHSL Handbook when sticky situations come up.

For example, one year at regionals there was a team who said PAY-pin instead of PEP-pin for Pepin the Short. The judges counted it wrong so I had to make an interpretation that took several sentences to say, "When in doubt, spell it out."

User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO
Contact:

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by Charlie Dees » Fri Dec 22, 2006 12:11 pm

MSHSAA Academic Competition Advisory committee.
1. Recommend that the Board confirm the approval of the participation of school academic competition teams in competitions during the summer vacation period when school is not in session, and that such allowance be added as an “Editor’s Note” under By-Law 640.


Amend: Recommend that the Board place the topic of summertime interscholastic academic competition on the agenda for the 2006-07 area meetings, and on the 2007 Annual Questionnaire. (Approved as amended)
Hmm? Does that sound troublesome?

East Buc & UMR
Posts: 5401
Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 12:00 am
Location: Gower
Contact:

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by East Buc & UMR » Fri Dec 22, 2006 1:58 pm

Now you know who came up with that. The COACHES on the Advisory committee

User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO
Contact:

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by Charlie Dees » Sat Dec 23, 2006 11:42 am

I would be curious to know which coaches came up with that idea.

FZW Coach
Posts: 874
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 12:00 am

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by FZW Coach » Mon Dec 25, 2006 9:45 pm

Everyone was fine with it at the meeting. The idea of throwing it to the AD's is just to make sure everything is clarified. That is the way I understood it during the meeting.

User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO
Contact:

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by Charlie Dees » Tue Dec 26, 2006 3:00 am

But I still can't quite tell what that resolution is actually saying. It could be harmless, or, knowing MSHSAA...

Online
User avatar
L-Town Expatriate
Posts: 5808
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 11:00 pm
Location: Riding a Mule down the Katy Trail to the State Fair

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by L-Town Expatriate » Tue Dec 26, 2006 8:52 pm

I think it basically legalizes playing as a team at national tournaments or summer scrimmages.

User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO
Contact:

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by Charlie Dees » Tue Dec 26, 2006 10:12 pm

My question is, though, could this also theoretically allow for banning teams from attending nationals?

Online
User avatar
L-Town Expatriate
Posts: 5808
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2004 11:00 pm
Location: Riding a Mule down the Katy Trail to the State Fair

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by L-Town Expatriate » Wed Dec 27, 2006 10:10 pm

ashkenaziCD wrote: My question is, though, could this also theoretically allow for banning teams from attending nationals?
As if they're not already?

User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO
Contact:

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by Charlie Dees » Thu Dec 28, 2006 3:05 am

Touche

User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:00 pm
Location: Columbia, MO
Contact:

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by Charlie Dees » Thu Dec 28, 2006 3:14 pm

And before someone gets on and says "well, MSHSAA lets teams go to nationals" I will immediately rebut that MSHSAA restrictions on attending nationals banned Liberty from attending both times they won state, and in in 1997 (when Mike Wehrman set tons of records that still have yet to be broken and probably never will be broken) NKC was banned from attending ASCN. By doing things like that MSHSAA is denying very very good teams a chance of being the best in the nation (many believe that NKC had a very, very good shot of winning nationals, especially since they had someone who by all accounts could be considered the nation's best player at the time). If I were MSHSAA I would be encouraging teams to go to nationals if they have a real chance of bringing home trophys. That would probably get MSHSAA more respect and notice, but they refuse to see it.

User avatar
PenforPrez
Posts: 816
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 11:00 pm
Location: Not quite Baltimore. Not quite Washington, D.C.
Contact:

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by PenforPrez » Thu Mar 26, 2009 9:13 pm

ScoBo1987 wrote:Was it the coaches association that ran it before 1996?
Yes. The predecessor to MACA, the Missouri Academic Association (MAA), ran the show before that. MAA ran state tournaments at least back to 1992. ( Note--3-26-09: Bill Luce confirmed to me recently that 1992 was the first MAA State tournament, and as such, the first official Missouri state tournament.)

I played for Cuba in the last MAA State tournament in 1995. We won Class 2 that day, and we had three All-Staters, including myself as a freshman (Juniors Jeff Branson and Anne Leicht being the other two). I have the booklet from that tournament still. :)

Pre-MSHSAA state champions, that I have records for:

1995: Class I: Bernie over a team I cannot remember. (Joe Turner's last year at Bernie; he put up Mike Wehrman-type numbers before Wehrman came along.)
Class II: Cuba over Cameron (345 to 165)
Class III: Savannah over SLUH (485 to 185, I think? It wasn't close. And a young NKC sophomore named Mike Wehrman averaged 16, I think. That was the year Savannah finished 4th at ASCN, with senior Shawn Logan [now the coach at Smithville] leading the way.)

1994: Class I: North Shelby over Purdy (405 to 175)
Class II: Bernie over Brookfield (330 to 265)
Class III: Savannah over Ft. Zumwalt South (295 to 285)

1993: Class I: Bernie over North Shelby (305 to 190)
Class II: Mary's Institute/Country Day over St. James (listed as John F. Hodge) (295 to 210)
Class III: Liberty over Ft. Zumwalt South (420 to 210; in the days of Conan and Louis Renfrow at Liberty)

1992: Class I: North Shelby over Palmyra (300 to 210)
Class II: Hannibal over William Chrisman (415 to 230)


<div class="editby">Edited by <a href='http://s4.zetaboards.com/Academic_Compe ... forPrez</a>, Mar 26 2009, 10:25:19 PM.</div>

Online
User avatar
Jeffrey Hill
Posts: 6363
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2004 11:00 pm
Location: In between the bright lights and the far unlit unknown (aka Johnson County, KS)
Contact:

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by Jeffrey Hill » Thu Mar 26, 2009 9:18 pm

Umm... I linked to it so you wouldn't have to post it again. Oh well, no big deal.

User avatar
PenforPrez
Posts: 816
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2006 11:00 pm
Location: Not quite Baltimore. Not quite Washington, D.C.
Contact:

How about a unified MSHSAA complaint thread?

Post by PenforPrez » Thu Mar 26, 2009 9:28 pm

U. Lou Sthagaim wrote:Umm... I linked to it so you wouldn't have to post it again. Oh well, no big deal.
I needed to go back in and add and change information to it. I've found out a few things since I posted that.

Post Reply