SOCREF-L Archives – June 2008, week 1

1. A controversy in T&T
   • Re: A controversy in T&T (120 lines)
     From: Wickham, Dennis <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 14:28:42 -0700

2. Announcers' Gems
   • Announcers' Gems (91 lines)
     From: Fred Speirs <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2008 23:40:34 -0500

3. English grammar in the LOAF
   • English grammar in the LOAF (32 lines)
     From: Sandy and Ferenc Korompai <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 10:28:40 -0500
   • Re: English grammar in the LOAF (42 lines)
     From: Patrick J. McNamara <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 12:53:18 -0400
   • Re: English grammar in the LOAF (53 lines)
     From: Fred Speirs <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 14:36:26 -0500
   • Re: English grammar in the LOAF (72 lines)
     From: Wickham, Dennis <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 16:09:11 -0700
   • Re: English grammar in the LOAF (53 lines)
     From: Gil Weber <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 19:20:15 -0400

4. Keepers and attackers before the ball is played on a set piece
   • Keepers and attackers before the ball is played on a set piece (16 lines)
     From: Michael I. Handler <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 16:32:46 -0400
   • Re: Keepers and attackers before the ball is played on a set piece (35 lines)
     From: Ed Marco <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 16:48:02 -0400

5. Less unsporting in the UK
   • Less unsporting in the UK (28 lines)
     From: Sandy and Ferenc Korompai <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2008 07:40:16 -0500

6. LOTG and SOTG
   • LOTG and SOTG (24 lines)
     From: Jim Gordon <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 03:16:21 -0400

7. Mandatory send-offs?
   • Mandatory send-offs? (36 lines)
     From: Mike Handler <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 06:15:50 -0400
   • Re: Mandatory send-offs? (70 lines)
     From: Tony Buckett <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 07:41:36 -0400
   • Re: Mandatory send-offs? (56 lines)
     From: Thomas Coatoam <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 15:59:11 -0400
   • Re: Mandatory send-offs? (66 lines)
     From: doug smith <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 20:04:14 +0000
   • Re: Mandatory send-offs? (53 lines)
     From: Wickham, Dennis <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 14:37:51 -0700
   • Re: Mandatory send-offs? (153 lines)
     From: Jim Gordon <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 03:06:21 -0400
   • Re: Mandatory send-offs? (227 lines)
     From: Mike Handler <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 08:01:43 -0400
   • Re: Mandatory send-offs? (175 lines)
     From: Ed Marco <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 09:24:13 -0400
   • Re: Mandatory send-offs? (227 lines)
     From: Patrick Duffy <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 09:43:44 -0700

8. MLS Week 9 in Review
   • Re: MLS Week 9 in Review (26 lines)
     From: Wickham, Dennis <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 14:51:30 -0700
   • Re: MLS Week 9 in Review (47 lines)
     From: Scott Riegelhaupt-Herzig <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 15:21:48 -0700
   • Re: MLS Week 9 in Review (62 lines)
     From: Gary Voshol <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 18:45:20 -0400
   • Re: MLS Week 9 in Review (60 lines)
     From: Wickham, Dennis <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 15:46:30 -0700
   • Re: MLS Week 9 in Review (53 lines)
     From: Gil Weber <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 18:51:18 -0400
   • Re: MLS Week 9 in Review (38 lines)
     From: Sandy and Ferenc Korompai <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 19:45:37 -0500
   • Re: MLS Week 9 in Review (47 lines)
     From: doug smith <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 01:43:54 +0000
   • Re: MLS Week 9 in Review (62 lines)
     From: Jim Geissman <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 19:19:12 -0700
   • Re: MLS Week 9 in Review (58 lines)
     From: Sandy and Ferenc Korompai <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 07:04:40 -0500

9. NCAA deep-sixes the Dual
   • NCAA deep-sixes the Dual (22 lines)
     From: doug smith <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 04:28:05 +0000
   • Re: NCAA deep-sixes the Dual (35 lines)
     From: Scott Riegelhaupt-Herzig <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 09:09:07 -0700
   • Re: NCAA deep-sixes the Dual (22 lines)
     From: Gil Weber <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 13:11:51 -0400
   • Re: NCAA deep-sixes the Dual (48 lines)
     From: Jason Currie <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 10:16:10 -0700
   • Re: NCAA deep-sixes the Dual (24 lines)
     From: William L Carey <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 13:25:21 EDT
   • Re: NCAA deep-sixes the Dual (55 lines)
     From: Ed Marco <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 13:30:52 -0400
   • Re: NCAA deep-sixes the Dual (42 lines)
     From: Domal, Roger <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 13:33:17 -0400
   • Re: NCAA deep-sixes the Dual (43 lines)
     From: Patrick Duffy <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 10:36:33 -0700
   • Re: NCAA deep-sixes the Dual (55 lines)
     From: Wickham, Dennis <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 10:47:02 -0700
   • Re: NCAA deep-sixes the Dual (67 lines)
     From: Ed Marco <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 13:54:01 -0400
   • Re: NCAA deep-sixes the Dual (50 lines)
     From: Jeff Greene <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 18:24:33 +0000
   • Re: NCAA deep-sixes the Dual (79 lines)
     From: Patrick Duffy <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 11:46:26 -0700
   • Re: NCAA deep-sixes the Dual (69 lines)
     From: Jason Currie <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 12:40:09 -0700
   • Re: NCAA deep-sixes the Dual (54 lines)
     From: doug smith <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 20:06:32 +0000
   • Re: NCAA deep-sixes the Dual (38 lines)
     From: [log in to unmask]
     Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 16:17:45 EDT
   • Re: NCAA deep-sixes the Dual (95 lines)
     From: Domal, Roger <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 16:37:28 -0400
   • Re: NCAA deep-sixes the Dual (31 lines)
     From: William L Carey <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 16:53:49 EDT
   • Re: NCAA deep-sixes the Dual (57 lines)
     From: Jim Geissman <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 14:24:14 -0700
   • Re: NCAA deep-sixes the Dual (59 lines)
     From: Ed Bellion <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 13:22:38 -0400
   • Re: NCAA deep-sixes the Dual (33 lines)
     From: Richard Hafner <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 16:51:54 -0700
   • Re: NCAA deep-sixes the Dual (45 lines)
     From: Ed Marco <[log in to unmask]>
     Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 22:01:34 -0400

10. NCAA deep-sixes the Dual- no duals--one ref, one AR, one Club
    • Re: NCAA deep-sixes the Dual- no duals--one ref, one AR, one Club (54 lines)
      From: CP Schwartz <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 21:07:51 EDT

11. New information - USA CUP '08
    • New information - USA CUP '08 (72 lines)
      From: Michael F. Rolfes <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2008 09:34:18 -0500

12. Question on Grade 7 fitness requirements
    • Question on Grade 7 fitness requirements (32 lines)
      From: Jim Duncan <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 10:26:54 -0400
    • Re: Question on Grade 7 fitness requirements (36 lines)
      From: Ed Marco <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 10:39:58 -0400
    • Re: Question on Grade 7 fitness requirements (126 lines)
      From: Jim Duncan <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 11:39:13 -0400
    • Re: Question on Grade 7 fitness requirements (29 lines)
      From: Ed Leafe <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 11:52:24 -0400
    • Re: Question on Grade 7 fitness requirements (53 lines)
      From: Les Baldwin <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 12:29:23 -0400
    • Re: Question on Grade 7 fitness requirements (47 lines)
      From: Jim Geissman <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 10:10:15 -0700
    • Re: Question on Grade 7 fitness requirements (70 lines)
      From: Bill Robinson <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 10:09:58 -0700
    • Re: Question on Grade 7 fitness requirements (41 lines)
      From: Kevin Burke <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 12:43:58 -0500
    • Re: Question on Grade 7 fitness requirements (66 lines)
      From: Gil Weber <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 14:08:39 -0400
    • Re: Question on Grade 7 fitness requirements (31 lines)
      From: doug smith <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 20:08:40 +0000
    • Re: Question on Grade 7 fitness requirements (56 lines)
      From: Jim Duncan <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 17:14:37 -0400
    • Re: Question on Grade 7 fitness requirements (64 lines)
      From: Ed Marco <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 17:46:45 -0400
    • Re: Question on Grade 7 fitness requirements (64 lines)
      From: Jim Duncan <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 19:19:40 -0400
    • Re: Question on Grade 7 fitness requirements (37 lines)
      From: Jim Gordon <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 19:33:14 -0400
    • Re: Question on Grade 7 fitness requirements (42 lines)
      From: Fred Speirs <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 18:24:22 -0500
    • Re: Question on Grade 7 fitness requirements (81 lines)
      From: Fred Speirs <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 18:23:38 -0500
    • Re: Question on Grade 7 fitness requirements (45 lines)
      From: Gil Weber <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 20:18:26 -0400
    • Re: Question on Grade 7 fitness requirements (32 lines)
      From: Chris Mohr <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2008 02:51:20 +0000
    • Re: Question on Grade 7 fitness requirements (110 lines)
      From: Ed Marco <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 22:59:22 -0400
    • Re: Question on Grade 7 fitness requirements (19 lines)
      From: Chris Mohr <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2008 03:01:56 +0000
    • Re: Question on Grade 7 fitness requirements (95 lines)
      From: Ed Marco <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 23:03:30 -0400
    • Re: Question on Grade 7 fitness requirements (48 lines)
      From: Jim Duncan <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 23:55:09 -0400

13. Referee improvement, was RE: Mandatory send-offs?
    • Referee improvement, was RE: Mandatory send-offs? (184 lines)
      From: Patrick Duffy <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 16:54:46 -0700
    • Re: Referee improvement, was RE: Mandatory send-offs? (46 lines)
      From: Mike Handler <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 22:37:03 -0400
    • Re: Referee improvement, was RE: Mandatory send-offs? (23 lines)
      From: George Parker <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 12:41:26 -0500
    • Re: Referee improvement, was RE: Mandatory send-offs? (44 lines)
      From: doug smith <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 19:12:10 +0000
    • Re: Referee improvement, was RE: Mandatory send-offs? (112 lines)
      From: Scott Riegelhaupt-Herzig <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 12:18:45 -0700
    • Re: Referee improvement, was RE: Mandatory send-offs? (143 lines)
      From: Andrew Ashmall-Liversidge <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 15:37:47 -0400
    • Re: Referee improvement, was RE: Mandatory send-offs? (174 lines)
      From: Scott Riegelhaupt-Herzig <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 12:40:39 -0700
    • Re: Referee improvement, was RE: Mandatory send-offs? (163 lines)
      From: Patrick Duffy <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 13:07:38 -0700
    • Re: Referee improvement, was RE: Mandatory send-offs? (177 lines)
      From: Scott Riegelhaupt-Herzig <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 13:20:11 -0700
    • Re: Referee improvement, was RE: Mandatory send-offs? (185 lines)
      From: Domal, Roger <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 16:23:29 -0400
    • Re: Referee improvement, was RE: Mandatory send-offs? (167 lines)
      From: Brian Whitney <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 13:24:05 -0700
    • Re: Referee improvement, was RE: Mandatory send-offs? (178 lines)
      From: Lawrence Savell <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 15:37:27 -0700
    • Re: Referee improvement, was RE: Mandatory send-offs? (58 lines)
      From: Mark Wroth <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Mon, 2 Jun 2008 20:26:37 -0700

14. the meaning of "mandatory"
    • the meaning of "mandatory" (38 lines)
      From: doug smith <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 18:40:06 +0000

15. The mechanism and prevention of soccer eye injuries
    • Re: The mechanism and prevention of soccer eye injuries (49 lines)
      From: Jim Duncan <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 23:14:28 -0400

16. three whistle
    • three whistle (22 lines)
      From: ront02769 <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 22:04:31 -0400

17. Three Whistle: Was NCAA
    • Three Whistle: Was NCAA (23 lines)
      From: Charlie Westerfield <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 18:48:31 -0400
    • Re: Three Whistle: Was NCAA (38 lines)
      From: Ed Marco <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 19:16:23 -0400
    • Re: Three Whistle: Was NCAA (27 lines)
      From: Chris Mohr <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 19:32:33 +0000
    • Re: Three Whistle: Was NCAA (41 lines)
      From: doug smith <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 20:17:09 +0000
    • Re: Three Whistle: Was NCAA (19 lines)
      From: J. Michael <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 08:32:40 -0400
    • Re: Three Whistle: Was NCAA (37 lines)
      From: Ed Leafe <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 08:52:47 -0400
    • Re: Three Whistle: Was NCAA (37 lines)
      From: doug smith <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 20:03:48 +0000
    • Re: Three Whistle: Was NCAA (78 lines)
      From: Fred Speirs <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2008 18:18:52 -0500

18. unsubscribe
    • unsubscribe (12 lines)
      From: Dino Nama <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 19:27:05 -0700

19. USA vs SPAIN
    • USA vs SPAIN (18 lines)
      From: Wayne Pav <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 19:26:26 -0400

20. USSF Memorandum 2008
    • Re: USSF Memorandum 2008 (56 lines)
      From: Wickham, Dennis <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2008 14:17:56 -0700

21. You are the ref quiz returns
    • You are the ref quiz returns (12 lines)
      From: Jim Geissman <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 15:44:35 -0400
    • Re: You are the ref quiz returns (38 lines)
      From: Morten Mikkelsen <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 20:13:56 -0400
    • Re: You are the ref quiz returns (42 lines)
      From: Gil Weber <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 20:28:01 -0400
    • Re: You are the ref quiz returns (34 lines)
      From: Ed Leafe <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Tue, 3 Jun 2008 21:33:06 -0400
    • Re: You are the ref quiz returns (31 lines)
      From: doug smith <[log in to unmask]>
      Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 01:59:29 +0000