cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board (http://www.cougarguard.com/forum/index.php)
-   Football (http://www.cougarguard.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=7)
-   -   There is a NCAA rule against "throwing the ball high in the air" (http://www.cougarguard.com/forum/showthread.php?t=22231)

MikeWaters 09-07-2008 02:01 AM

There is a NCAA rule against "throwing the ball high in the air"
 
Of course the ESPN guys say that the throw wasn't high in the air.

All I know is that it was high enough to leave the viewing area.

We need someone to time how long it took to leave his hand to when it landed and then calculate the height of the throw.

So many pussies. I hope Locker takes responsibility for being a moron.

Solon 09-07-2008 02:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters (Post 262436)
Of course the ESPN guys say that the throw wasn't high in the air.

All I know is that it was high enough to leave the viewing area.

We need someone to time how long it took to leave his hand to when it landed and then calculate the height of the throw.

So many pussies. I hope Locker takes responsibility for being a moron.

You can see the ball come down a few seconds later behind Locker's head. It went really high.

MikeWaters 09-07-2008 02:06 AM

I just saw the other thread with the Pac-10 official's quote.

I think it's really silly that ESPN Mark May is saying that it wasn't a high throw in the air that qualified for a penalty.

Solon 09-07-2008 02:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters (Post 262438)
I just saw the other thread with the Pac-10 official's quote.

I think it's really silly that ESPN Mark May is saying that it wasn't a high throw in the air that qualified for a penalty.

Plus, it detracts from the play of the game - the blocked kick.

The announcers are acting like a regular PAT would have been a chip-shot.

BYU blocked the kick. It's not like it fell short, because the kicker had too little leg. I know the trajectory changes slightly with the greater distance, but that kick is blocked whether it was spotted on the 1, or the 45 yard lines. BYU's front blew up the kicking team. Blew up.

TheSizzle36 09-07-2008 02:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Solon (Post 262439)
Plus, it detracts from the play of the game - the blocked kick.

The announcers are acting like a regular PAT would have been a chip-shot.

BYU blocked the kick. It's not like it fell short, because the kicker had too little leg. I know the trajectory changes slightly with the greater distance, but that kick is blocked whether it was spotted on the 1, or the 45 yard lines. BYU's front blew up the kicking team. Blew up.

Exactly. I laughed my head off at everybody screaming that the refs decided the game. No, BYU decided the game by getting push and blocking the PAT.

Cali Coug 09-07-2008 03:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSizzle36 (Post 262444)
Exactly. I laughed my head off at everybody screaming that the refs decided the game. No, BYU decided the game by getting push and blocking the PAT.

Not only that, but the extra point was to TIE the game. Given BYU's offensive success, does anyone think UW could have stopped BYU from the 25? Really? The game should have ended with Unga. Right result regardless. BYU outplayed them and deserved to win.

Brian 09-07-2008 03:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cali Coug (Post 262449)
Not only that, but the extra point was to TIE the game. Given BYU's offensive success, does anyone think UW could have stopped BYU from the 25? Really? The game should have ended with Unga. Right result regardless. BYU outplayed them and deserved to win.

you forget that they would also have had to stop UW. That is not a gimme.
Congrats on your less than impressive win over a high school team and a squeaker over a suspect PAC-10 team. But, hey, whatever it takes to finally get an non-conf. road win.

UtahDan 09-07-2008 03:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cali Coug (Post 262449)
Not only that, but the extra point was to TIE the game. Given BYU's offensive success, does anyone think UW could have stopped BYU from the 25? Really? The game should have ended with Unga. Right result regardless. BYU outplayed them and deserved to win.

Guess we'll never know.

TheAzzuri 09-07-2008 03:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian (Post 262451)
you forget that they would also have had to stop UW. That is not a gimme.
Congrats on your less than impressive win over a high school team and a squeaker over a suspect PAC-10 team. But, hey, whatever it takes to finally get an non-conf. road win.


Congrats vs. UNLV as well.
________
Avandia Settlement

TheAzzuri 09-07-2008 03:40 AM

The call was the right one. The rule, however, is completely stupid.
________
Kids Wellbutrin

SeattleUte 09-07-2008 03:52 AM

Thoughts:

1) The refs shouldn't have made that call then. There is room for discretion. I was there. The ball didn't go that high. You don't call outcome determinative celebration penalties where the kid flipped the ball over his shoulder. It's just not done. I don't care how long it took for the ball to land. This is a game played by kids, anyway (except for BYU, which has 70% RM's).

2) The PAT was blocked because the trajectory was lower. The kid was kicking from 40 yards beyond the goal posts. Be honest with yourselves.

3) Still, the blocked PAT was once more instance of what I felt was poor execution overall by Washington.

4) Wide open guys overthrown or dropping passes in four out of five downs on that last drive. Washington is an inept team. I'm now firmly in the fire Willingham camp. It's a bad team. I want Willinghm out.

5) When Washington really needed to make a play Locker just boot legged it. BYU seems big but slow afoot on defense. But for the bad celebration call I'd have liked to have seen Washington just go for two and let Locker run it, quarterback draw or something. I wonder if BYU could have prevented him from getting in the end zone.

6) Once again, Cali can see things no other way but his way. It's so patently obvious to him BYU would have won in OT, who cares about the unconscionable celebration call? (I can only imagine the reaction here and on CB had the call gone the other way.) Vintage Cali. (Cali, where does the LDS Church keep those $5 billion in green backs lying around?)

7) Still, I tend to agree Washington is just too inept to have won in OT. All the fans around me wanted Washington to go for two until the penalty was called.

8) I hope Washington has an extreme patsy on its schedule (I haven't checked), because otherwise it may not win a game. Last year I think it was 2-10. It is destined for 8-10 place in the Pac 10. No way it finishes higher than 8th. Willingham is done.

9) We arrived at half time. I had to shoo away a BYU fan reclinging in our seats.

10) A couple of BYU slogans I saw on shirts seemed cult-like. "Fully invested." "The Quest." What do they mean?

11) I decided BM is an asshole on this basis: He asked for two plays reviewed that were obvious from where I sat and on the big monitor the refs got right (the Unga fumble and the long Wasington pass to the right out of bounds on the last drive). I wish they penalized 15 yards when a team does that and the call isn't even close.

BarbaraGordon 09-07-2008 03:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleUte (Post 262461)
Thoughts:

1) The refs shouldn't have made that call then. There is room for discretion. I was there. The ball didn't go that high. You don't call outcome determinative celebration penalties where the kid flipped the ball over his shoulder. It's just not done. I don't care how long it took for the ball to land. This is a game played by kids, anyway (except for BYU, which has 70% RM's).

2) The PAT was blocked because the trajectory was lower. The kid was kicking from 40 yards beyond the goal posts. Be honest with yourselves.

3) Still, the blocked PAT was once more instance of what I felt was poor execution overall by Washington.

4) Wide open guys overthrown or dropping passes in four out of five downs on that last drive. Washington is an inept team. I'm now firmly in the fire Willingham camp. It's a bad team. I want Willinghm out.

5) When Washington really needed to make a play Locker just boot legged it. BYU seems big but slow afoot on defense. But for the bad celebration call I'd have liked to have seen Washington just go for two and let Locker run it, quarterback draw or something. I wonder if BYU could have prevented him from getting in the end zone.

6) Once again, Cali can see things no other way but his way. It's so patently obvious to him BYU would have won in OT, who cares about the unconscionable celebration call? (I can only imagine the reaction here and on CB had the call gone the other way.) Vintage Cali. (Cali, where does the LDS Church keep those $5 billion in green backs lying around?)

7) Still, I tend to agree Washington is just too inept to have won in OT. All the fans around me wanted Washington to go for two until the penalty was called.

8) I hope Washington has an extreme patsy on its schedule (I haven't checked), because otherwise it may not win a game. Last year I think it was 2-10. It is destined for 8-10 place in the Pac 10. No way it finishes higher than 8th. Willingham is done.

9) We arrived at half time. I had to shoo away a BYU fan reclinging in our seats.

10) A couple of BYU slogans I saw on shirts seemed cult-like. "Fully invested." "The Quest." What do they mean?

11) I decided BM is an asshole on this basis: He asked for two plays reviewed that were obvious from where I sat and on the big monitor the refs got right (the Unga fumble and the long Wasington pass to the right out of bounds on the last drive). I wish they penalized 15 yards when a team does that and the call isn't even close.

So I take it you had a good time?

SeattleUte 09-07-2008 04:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon (Post 262465)
So I take it you had a good time?

I did. For one thing, I bet all who were there will agree that the day was beautiful enough to die for. We parked on the north end of the campus and walked through it. Very lovely. The lake, etc. were spectacular.

My boy was wonderful. I think he could have lasted a whole game. He was perhaps most interested in the ambulance that came onto the field to take the player with the concussion away. We were in the shade and there was a breeze coming off the lake, and I bought him a frozen lemonade. So he got a bit of a chill and the last six minutes I wound up with him on my lap and me cuddling him. But that was convenient as well as sweet because I had to pick him up so he could see for all the standing at the end.

YOhio 09-07-2008 04:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleUte (Post 262461)
2) The PAT was blocked because the trajectory was lower. The kid was kicking from 40 yards beyond the goal posts. Be honest with yourselves.

Be honest. 35 yards. How often is a 35 yard FG blocked? One in Twenty? Maybe less?

Speaking of bad calls...a flag should have been thrown on the blocked PAT. Former Carbon Dino Jan Jorgenson was being held. Despite that, he still blocked the kick.

http://assets.espn.go.com/media/apph...ac6899f616.jpg

ute4ever 09-07-2008 04:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cali Coug (Post 262449)
Not only that, but the extra point was to TIE the game. Given BYU's offensive success, does anyone think UW could have stopped BYU from the 25? Really? The game should have ended with Unga. Right result regardless. BYU outplayed them and deserved to win.

BYU had 10 drives and scored 4 times. Washington had 9 drives and scored 4 times.
Overtime would not have been a gimme for either team.

Venkman 09-07-2008 04:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by YOhio (Post 262471)
Be honest. 35 yards. How often is a 35 yard FG blocked? One in Twenty? Maybe less?

Speaking of bad calls...a flag should have been thrown on the blocked PAT. Former Carbon Dino Jan Jorgenson was being held. Despite that, he still blocked the kick.

http://assets.espn.go.com/media/apph...ac6899f616.jpg

What is this *holding* you speak of? Honest question.

Signed,
PAC 10 officials

SeattleUte 09-07-2008 04:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by YOhio (Post 262471)
Be honest. 35 yards. How often is a 35 yard FG blocked? One in Twenty? Maybe less?

Speaking of bad calls...a flag should have been thrown on the blocked PAT. Former Carbon Dino Jan Jorgenson was being held. Despite that, he still blocked the kick.

http://assets.espn.go.com/media/apph...ac6899f616.jpg

This is the type of holding call you let go. He had a corner of his jersey. I don't see the BYU guy being detained at all.

UtahDan 09-07-2008 04:12 AM

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/fp/fl...e&pollId=59911

Just sayin.

SeattleUte 09-07-2008 04:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UtahDan (Post 262479)

What's telling is go to the real football states, Florida, California, Michigan, Texas, Louisiana, and see how they voted.

YOhio 09-07-2008 04:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleUte (Post 262485)
What's telling is go to the real football states, Florida, California, Michigan, Texas, Louisiana, and see how they voted.

That's just because fans hate refs and on a controversial call they'll always side with the player. That said, I wish the refs hadn't made the call. I hate that it takes away from a long-anticipated out of conference road win.

I also hate the whining that the call cost Washington the game. They faced adversity in a controversial call and failed to meet the task. BYU blocked the kick, one that is generally considered a gimme. That's why Washington lost.

BlueHair 09-07-2008 05:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleUte (Post 262461)
Thoughts:


2) The PAT was blocked because the trajectory was lower. The kid was kicking from 40 yards beyond the goal posts. Be honest with yourselves.

Bullshit. That would have been blocked at any distance. I don't believe in blaming officials, but since we are on the topic, Washington got the benefit of the doubt on every play until then. Totally one sided officiating. I was stunned they allowed BYU to win. Usually PAC 10 officials come up with phantom holding penalties, botched replays (see Oklahoma game), phantom face masks (BYU vs UCLA). It was a miracle. I bet they get fired for allowing BYU to win.

ChinoCoug 09-07-2008 06:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleUte (Post 262461)

2) The PAT was blocked because the trajectory was lower. The kid was kicking from 40 yards beyond the goal posts. Be honest with yourselves.

5) When Washington really needed to make a play Locker just boot legged it. BYU seems big but slow afoot on defense. But for the bad celebration call I'd have liked to have seen Washington just go for two and let Locker run it, quarterback draw or something. I wonder if BYU could have prevented him from getting in the end zone.

Do you know what a bootleg is and do you know how to add? 25+10=35

Jeff Lebowski 09-07-2008 06:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters (Post 262436)
Of course the ESPN guys say that the throw wasn't high in the air.

All I know is that it was high enough to leave the viewing area.

We need someone to time how long it took to leave his hand to when it landed and then calculate the height of the throw.

So many pussies. I hope Locker takes responsibility for being a moron.

Give me the time and I can do the calculations.

creekster 09-07-2008 06:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChinoCoug (Post 262533)
Do you know what a bootleg is and do you know how to add? 25+10=35


Sorry SU but chino is right here; Locker got yards when they split the defense and he ran up the middle. I don't recall any bootlegs.

Jeff Lebowski 09-07-2008 06:39 AM

You kill me sometimes, SU. Posts like this make me laugh every time you get self-righteous and accuse someone of bias.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleUte (Post 262461)
2) The PAT was blocked because the trajectory was lower. The kid was kicking from 40 yards beyond the goal posts. Be honest with yourselves.

That's just bullshit. That kick didn't have a prayer. With that surge they would have blocked the PAT from anywhere.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleUte (Post 262461)
6) Once again, Cali can see things no other way but his way. It's so patently obvious to him BYU would have won in OT, who cares about the unconscionable celebration call? (I can only imagine the reaction here and on CB had the call gone the other way.) Vintage Cali. (Cali, where does the LDS Church keep those $5 billion in green backs lying around?)

Pot, meet kettle. The celebration call did not take points off the board. The game was lost on the blocked PAT.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleUte (Post 262461)
9) We arrived at half time. I had to shoo away a BYU fan reclinging in our seats.

So? Did they not move?

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleUte (Post 262461)
10) A couple of BYU slogans I saw on shirts seemed cult-like. "Fully invested." "The Quest." What do they mean?

LOL. That's right. It's a secret cult message. It is derived from our new temple ceremonies and has to do with plural marriage on the planet Kolob. If you come back, we will let you in on it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleUte (Post 262461)
11) I decided BM is an asshole on this basis: He asked for two plays reviewed that were obvious from where I sat and on the big monitor the refs got right (the Unga fumble and the long Wasington pass to the right out of bounds on the last drive). I wish they penalized 15 yards when a team does that and the call isn't even close.

Are you kidding me? Asking for a review makes someone an asshole? This is the dumbass post of the week. It also demonstrates that you don't have a clue on the replay rule. When he does ask for a review, he has to do it quickly or the next play will start and it will be too late. He doesn't have time to sit and wait for a replay on the big board to decide whether or not a review is warranted. Furthermore, he can only request one review per game. Most of the reviews are done by the officiating crew when they are unsure. I doubt he asked for either of those reviews. Was BYU charged a timeout? Here is the rule:

Quote:

2) The head coach of either team may request that the game be stopped and a play be reviewed by challenging the on-field ruling one time during a game. A coach initiates this challenge by taking a team time out before the ball is next put in play and informing the referee that the coach is challenging the ruling of the previous play. After a review has been completed, if the on-field ruling is reversed, that team's time out will not be charged. After a review has been completed and the on-field ruling is not reversed, the charged team's time out counts as one of three permitted for that half.

Jeff Lebowski 09-07-2008 06:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski (Post 262538)
Give me the time and I can do the calculations.

What I mean is, tell me how many seconds it was and I can tell you the height.

BlueHair 09-07-2008 07:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski (Post 262543)
What I mean is, tell me how many seconds it was and I can tell you the height.

I read somewhere else it was 2.36 seconds. Don't you need velocity to make the calculation?

BlueK 09-07-2008 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters (Post 262436)
Of course the ESPN guys say that the throw wasn't high in the air.

All I know is that it was high enough to leave the viewing area.

We need someone to time how long it took to leave his hand to when it landed and then calculate the height of the throw.

So many pussies. I hope Locker takes responsibility for being a moron.

It's always been against the rules for players in the college game to throw the ball away after a play instead of giving it to the ref.

Colly Wolly 09-07-2008 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UtahDan (Post 262479)

What's that Mark Twain line about statistics?

Colly Wolly 09-07-2008 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleUte (Post 262476)
This is the type of holding call you let go. He had a corner of his jersey. I don't see the BYU guy being detained at all.

Foolish.

TheSizzle36 09-07-2008 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleUte (Post 262461)
Thoughts:

1) The refs shouldn't have made that call then. There is room for discretion. I was there. The ball didn't go that high. You don't call outcome determinative celebration penalties where the kid flipped the ball over his shoulder. It's just not done. I don't care how long it took for the ball to land. This is a game played by kids, anyway (except for BYU, which has 70% RM's).

2) The PAT was blocked because the trajectory was lower. The kid was kicking from 40 yards beyond the goal posts. Be honest with yourselves.

3) Still, the blocked PAT was once more instance of what I felt was poor execution overall by Washington.

4) Wide open guys overthrown or dropping passes in four out of five downs on that last drive. Washington is an inept team. I'm now firmly in the fire Willingham camp. It's a bad team. I want Willinghm out.

5) When Washington really needed to make a play Locker just boot legged it. BYU seems big but slow afoot on defense. But for the bad celebration call I'd have liked to have seen Washington just go for two and let Locker run it, quarterback draw or something. I wonder if BYU could have prevented him from getting in the end zone.

6) Once again, Cali can see things no other way but his way. It's so patently obvious to him BYU would have won in OT, who cares about the unconscionable celebration call? (I can only imagine the reaction here and on CB had the call gone the other way.) Vintage Cali. (Cali, where does the LDS Church keep those $5 billion in green backs lying around?)

7) Still, I tend to agree Washington is just too inept to have won in OT. All the fans around me wanted Washington to go for two until the penalty was called.

8) I hope Washington has an extreme patsy on its schedule (I haven't checked), because otherwise it may not win a game. Last year I think it was 2-10. It is destined for 8-10 place in the Pac 10. No way it finishes higher than 8th. Willingham is done.

9) We arrived at half time. I had to shoo away a BYU fan reclinging in our seats.

10) A couple of BYU slogans I saw on shirts seemed cult-like. "Fully invested." "The Quest." What do they mean?

11) I decided BM is an asshole on this basis: He asked for two plays reviewed that were obvious from where I sat and on the big monitor the refs got right (the Unga fumble and the long Wasington pass to the right out of bounds on the last drive). I wish they penalized 15 yards when a team does that and the call isn't even close.

http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i1...36/SUTroll.jpg

ute4ever 09-07-2008 05:35 PM

Pie Jesu Domine!! Dona eis requiem.

http://www.utefans.net/user_images/143783334_photo3.jpg

Jeff Lebowski 09-07-2008 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlueHair (Post 262551)
I read somewhere else it was 2.36 seconds. Don't you need velocity to make the calculation?

No, you can solve for it.

He threw the ball 16 ft above his head. I assumed he is six feet tall, so it went a total of 22 ft above the ground.

In case you are interested, here is how I did it:

The ball is going to start with some unknown velocity (v), go up in the air in a parabolic arc and then come back to the ground. As it passes the point from which he threw it (6 ft) on the way down it will be traveling with the same velocity (v) it started with but in the opposite direction. There are two parts to the path:

part a (up and down to his head):
height = ya
time = ta

part b (from his head to the ground):
height = yb = 6
time = tb

Now we can set up some equations:

ya = v^2/(2*g)
(g= gravitational constant = 32.2 ft/sec^2)
yb = 6 = v*tb + (1/2)*g*tb^2
ta + tb = 2.36
ta = (2*v)/g

I threw these in a spreadsheet and solved for v using the Goal Seek function. Final values:

v: 31.9 ft/s
ta: 1.98 s
tb: 0.38 s
ya: 15.8 ft

Took me about ten minutes to solve. Yes, I am a geek and proud of it.

ute4ever 09-07-2008 07:35 PM

LOL Jeff, do you mind if I share that on Utefans (aka Cougarboard lite), source anonymous?

Jeff Lebowski 09-07-2008 07:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ute4ever (Post 262611)
LOL Jeff, do you mind if I share that on Utefans (aka Cougarboard lite), source anonymous?

No problem.

PaloAltoCougar 09-07-2008 08:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleUte (Post 262461)
I decided BM is an asshole on this basis: He asked for two plays reviewed that were obvious from where I sat and on the big monitor the refs got right (the Unga fumble and the long Wasington pass to the right out of bounds on the last drive). I wish they penalized 15 yards when a team does that and the call isn't even close.

Although there were a few other errors in your narrative, this one pleased me the most, as it serves as a model of most of your rips against BYU and the Church. You begin with your conclusion (in this case, "BM is an asshole"), then work back in search of supporting facts. Both of the plays were reviewed at the behest of the refs, not Bronco. I don't recall BYU being charged with a timeout with the Unga call (although who could have blamed any coach for challening a fumble that, give or take six inches, made the difference between a TD and turnover?), and neither the stadium announcer, the official box score, nor any of the Seattle papers mentioned anything about a coach's challenge. In view of this, who is the asshole?

But you were correct about it being an extremely nice day. My son and I enjoyed the game; the stadium was a fun place to watch a game. We were low on the sideline next to the endzone with an unobstructed view of Locker's celebration. I've never felt more humiliated than by his egregiously offensive display of poor sportsmanship and taunting. Actually, I thought he was a superb athlete and didn't think he did anything wrong at all. At the time, I assumed a Dawg player has said something offensive, although that would have been surprising because I didn't see any nastiness from either side throughout the game. It was an unfortunate call. But BYU outstatted UW in every offensive and defensive category, and deserved to win.

Downtown Seattle last evening was gorgeous. We had a nice meal at Etta's (?), and I returned to the Space Needle for the first time since 1962 when I was 9 years old. Didn't notice any changes, other than a major price increase. Assholes.

ute4ever 09-07-2008 09:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PaloAltoCougar (Post 262625)
I returned to the Space Needle for the first time since 1962 when I was 9 years old. Didn't notice any changes, other than a major price increase. Assholes.

Four years ago I made the mistake of going to the Space Needle with an engineer. He just wanted to walk around it drooling while muttering "of course! Triple reinforced truss!" "Wow, no diagonal elements anywhere!" "Lateral load-bearing systems, naturally!"

PaloAltoCougar 09-07-2008 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ute4ever (Post 262628)
Four years ago I made the mistake of going to the Space Needle with an engineer. He just wanted to walk around it drooling while muttering "of course! Triple reinforced truss!" "Wow, no diagonal elements anywhere!" "Lateral load-bearing systems, naturally!"

That might have been interesting, for about three minutes anyway. Unfortunately, engineers seem to thrive on tedium and I feel your pain. As we were ascending, it occurred to me that earthquake building standards may have evolved in the past 46 years, and I was hoping a 7.0 didn't hit while we were up there. Perhaps you could ask your friend about whether the Needle has been retrofitted, or if that's even needed. Okay, don't.

Jeff Lebowski 09-07-2008 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PaloAltoCougar (Post 262632)
That might have been interesting, for about three minutes anyway. Unfortunately, engineers seem to thrive on tedium and I feel your pain. As we were ascending, it occurred to me that earthquake building standards may have evolved in the past 46 years, and I was hoping a 7.0 didn't hit while we were up there. Perhaps you could ask your friend about whether the Needle has been retrofitted, or if that's even needed. Okay, don't.

Up yours. Both of you.


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:53 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.