SOCREF-L Archives – November 2010, week 1

1. "negative" signal
   • "negative" signal (21 lines)
     From: So Cal Lurker <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 16:46:26 -0400
   • Re: "negative" signal (41 lines)
     From: Sandy and Ferenc Korompai <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 16:30:33 -0500
   • "negative" signal (34 lines)
     From: D A <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 19:09:55 -0400

2. another top pro league ref crew got a month suspension
   • another top pro league ref crew got a month suspension (21 lines)
     From: D A <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2010 14:03:43 -0500
   • Re: another top pro league ref crew got a month suspension (29 lines)
     From: Ed Marco <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2010 17:44:00 -0500

3. big CR AR boo boo in ManU vs Spurs
   • Re: big CR AR boo boo in ManU vs Spurs (64 lines)
     From: Ed Marco <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 09:29:39 -0400
   • Re: big CR AR boo boo in ManU vs Spurs (72 lines)
     From: Domal, Roger <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 09:46:26 -0400
   • Re: big CR AR boo boo in ManU vs Spurs (87 lines)
     From: Donn Milton <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 09:49:04 -0500
   • Re: big CR AR boo boo in ManU vs Spurs (23 lines)
     From: Rich Zumpone <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 05:53:45 -0400
   • Re: big CR AR boo boo in ManU vs Spurs (33 lines)
     From: Lawrence Savell <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 06:59:50 -0700

4. CR OS signal for USSF games?
   • CR OS signal for USSF games? (16 lines)
     From: Phil Dillard <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 16:24:25 -0400
   • Re: CR OS signal for USSF games? (24 lines)
     From: Jorge L. Gimeno <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 13:35:39 -0700
   • Re: CR OS signal for USSF games? (27 lines)
     From: Scott Riegelhaupt-Herzig <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 13:30:20 -0700
   • Re: CR OS signal for USSF games? (25 lines)
     From: Domal, Roger <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 16:28:18 -0400
   • Re: CR OS signal for USSF games? (25 lines)
     From: Matt Jacob <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 13:37:56 -0700
   • Re: CR OS signal for USSF games? (27 lines)
     From: Adam Behrens <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 16:03:05 -0500
   • Re: CR OS signal for USSF games? (41 lines)
     From: [log in to unmask]
     Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 17:06:28 -0400
   • Re: CR OS signal for USSF games? (64 lines)
     From: cmohrworld <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 15:09:14 -0700
   • Re: CR OS signal for USSF games? (21 lines)
     From: Ed Marco <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 21:25:42 -0400
   • Re: CR OS signal for USSF games? (49 lines)
     From: Moto REF <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2010 15:14:12 -0700
   • Re: CR OS signal for USSF games? (63 lines)
     From: Richard Houser <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2010 20:50:41 -0700
   • Re: CR OS signal for USSF games? (73 lines)
     From: doug smith <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 08:11:46 +0000
   • Re: CR OS signal for USSF games? (26 lines)
     From: Chris Landers <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 06:40:32 -0700
   • Re: CR OS signal for USSF games? (75 lines)
     From: So Cal Lurker <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 12:20:35 -0400

5. GK responsibility and time wasting
   • GK responsibility and time wasting (41 lines)
     From: Reza Pazirandeh <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 16:20:35 -0700
   • Re: GK responsibility and time wasting (51 lines)
     From: Ed Marco <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 20:37:17 -0400
   • Re: GK responsibility and time wasting (38 lines)
     From: joe bean <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 18:39:43 -0700
   • Re: GK responsibility and time wasting (33 lines)
     From: Sandy and Ferenc Korompai <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 07:29:05 -0500

6. high school Law-3 vs fifa Law-3
   • high school Law-3 vs fifa Law-3 (40 lines)
     From: D A <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 23:28:51 -0400
   • Re: high school Law-3 vs fifa Law-3 (54 lines)
     From: Lawrence Savell <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 21:28:17 -0700

7. How should referees deal with known thugs?
   • How should referees deal with known thugs? (40 lines)
     From: Reddy, Bernard <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 13:59:28 -0400
   • Re: How should referees deal with known thugs? (29 lines)
     From: Ron Leedy <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 12:33:42 -0700
   • Re: How should referees deal with known thugs? (31 lines)
     From: Gary Stephens <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 15:04:38 -0500
   • Re: How should referees deal with known thugs? (61 lines)
     From: John Levitt & Larry Huey <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 16:13:31 -0400
   • Re: How should referees deal with known thugs? (59 lines)
     From: Patrick Duffy <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 15:57:00 -0700
   • Re: How should referees deal with known thugs? (59 lines)
     From: Brian Smith-White <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2010 11:20:15 -0400

8. Seattle vs. LA (no score)
   • Re: Seattle vs. LA (no score) (25 lines)
     From: Laurent Delamare <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2010 21:23:08 -0700
   • Re: Seattle vs. LA (no score) (38 lines)
     From: Tom Simonds <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 00:43:20 -0400
   • Re: Seattle vs. LA (no score) (51 lines)
     From: Laurent Delamare <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 07:45:25 -0700
   • Re: Seattle vs. LA (no score) (60 lines)
     From: Domal, Roger <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 10:52:20 -0400

9. the crew of this match (Algerian league) was suspended (by the Alegerian ref committee) for a month for poor performance
   • the crew of this match (Algerian league) was suspended (by the Alegerian ref committee) for a month for poor performance (16 lines)
     From: D A <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2010 13:32:22 -0500

10. what would you do
    • what would you do (25 lines)
      From: lee jordan <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 13:35:42 -0700
    • Re: what would you do (49 lines)
      From: Burke, Rick A CIV OSD DMEA <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 13:52:28 -0700
    • Re: what would you do (37 lines)
      From: Ed Marco <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 17:26:55 -0400
    • Re: what would you do (34 lines)
      From: Reza Pazirandeh <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 14:24:01 -0700
    • Re: what would you do (44 lines)
      From: Sandy and Ferenc Korompai <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 17:13:01 -0500
    • Re: what would you do (32 lines)
      From: lee jordan <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 15:23:53 -0700
    • Re: what would you do (44 lines)
      From: So Cal Lurker <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 19:51:01 -0400
    • Re: what would you do (34 lines)
      From: Ed Marco <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 21:05:56 -0400
    • Re: what would you do (61 lines)
      From: [log in to unmask]
      Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2010 16:29:06 -0400
    • Re: what would you do (50 lines)
      From: Reddy, Bernard <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2010 22:46:48 -0400
    • Re: what would you do (36 lines)
      From: Ed Marco <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2010 00:50:16 -0400
    • Re: what would you do (79 lines)
      From: Reza Pazirandeh <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2010 23:27:17 -0700
    • Re: what would you do (103 lines)
      From: Ed Marco <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2010 08:22:01 -0500
    • Re: what would you do (34 lines)
      From: Phil Dillard <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2010 08:45:10 -0500
    • Re: what would you do (91 lines)
      From: [log in to unmask]
      Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2010 09:05:24 -0500
    • Re: what would you do (115 lines)
      From: So Cal Lurker <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2010 10:05:27 -0500
    • Re: what would you do (98 lines)
      From: Lawrence Savell <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2010 07:43:56 -0800
    • Re: what would you do (152 lines)
      From: Ed Marco <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2010 11:18:50 -0500

11. what would you do-no goal
    • Re: what would you do-no goal (44 lines)
      From: CP Schwartz <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 17:15:12 -0400

12. What would you do?
    • Re: What would you do? (67 lines)
      From: [log in to unmask]
      Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 09:20:03 -0400
    • Re: What would you do? (121 lines)
      From: [log in to unmask]
      Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 09:26:19 -0400
    • Re: What would you do? (114 lines)
      From: Patrick Duffy <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 09:32:51 -0700
    • Re: What would you do? (117 lines)
      From: Peter S. Goldberger <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 12:43:45 -0400
    • Re: What would you do? (237 lines)
      From: [log in to unmask]
      Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 15:38:40 -0400
    • Re: What would you do? (45 lines)
      From: Sandy and Ferenc Korompai <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 16:19:09 -0500

13. What's the official reason for the disqualification?
    • Re: What's the official reason for the disqualification? (126 lines)
      From: William Guynes <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 08:42:11 -0400
    • Re: What's the official reason for the disqualification? (188 lines)
      From: Gary Voshol <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 12:59:50 +0000
    • Re: What's the official reason for the disqualification? (57 lines)
      From: Sandy and Ferenc Korompai <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 08:23:05 -0500
    • Re: What's the official reason for the disqualification? (42 lines)
      From: [log in to unmask]
      Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 09:24:41 -0400
    • Re: What's the official reason for the disqualification? (129 lines)
      From: [log in to unmask]
      Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 09:32:23 -0400
    • Re: What's the official reason for the disqualification? (146 lines)
      From: William Guynes <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 10:36:50 -0400
    • Re: What's the official reason for the disqualification? (93 lines)
      From: b bode <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 11:43:25 -0500
    • Re: What's the official reason for the disqualification? (119 lines)
      From: Patrick Duffy <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 12:49:03 -0700