Wes, it is my understanding that in the situation you wrote about above, the Refs can award the ball to the other team, once they have seen the indisputable visual evidence that it didn't go off Player from Team 'A', but rather the player from Team 'B'.

Now on a 'judgement' call (charge/block being a good example), you cannot overturn one of those after looking the tape.

IMO, who the ball goes off of is not a 'judgement' call as defined in basketball refereeing.

I see what you had in your mind, Wes, when you asked that question. That UK - MSU game was an excellent example.

For us KY guys, the post-Tubby situation is never off-topic. A columnist in CJ today had an article which focused on 'the glower'. I sent him a note which said: 'This season I began to have thoughts that maybe 'the glower' was turning potential recruits off. Didn't look like much fun playing here.

When you watch on TV, you almost never hear what the coach is saying (too much cursing, I guess). Sometimes, Coach Smith could be saying nice things to a player or complimenting him, but it looked like he was chewing him out. Also, the players the last couple of years seem to be a dour bunch (and that probably didn't help the perceptions I was talking about above).

Having Coach Smith leave could be great or it could be terrible, it all depends on who gets hired to replace him. Me, I'm betting on the current coach at Oregon (heh).

Anyway, I hope all you sports nuts have a great weekend, even you Buckeye Mike ;-)

Greg above listed a bunch of players who were drafted into NBA out of HS in last 12 - 13 years. Many of those mentioned have had so-so careers to date. Some are already out of league. Still, if you were to check those guy's bank accounts today, you'd be hard pressed to say they made a mistake when they came out.

I, personally, hate drafting underclassmen. I only hate it though, because it has half-ruined college basketball (IMO) from a fan's perspective. I think it would have made for far better college basketball watching if those guys had all been toiling for some college for 3 or 4 years. I think NCAA men's basketball peaked in late 80s & early 90s (from a competative viewpoint).

I think if I had guaranteed 1st round NBA money, I'd go in a heartbeat. Only downside would be getting stuck on a real crappy team.

Some dumbass named Vilmos sqawked: 'The fact remains that it is not illegal to remove attorneys for no reason other than political ones. Every President in the last 50 years has done it. It should not be the case, but sadly, it is.

The irony is, if the Democrats succeed here, and get Gonzales or Rove or both fired, when they take back the White House in '08, they'll be unable to fire all the attorneys Bush appointed without instantly looking ridiculous.'

I'm picking on ole Vilmos here, but several other dipshits have spewed basically the same piece of misleading crap.

When Pres Reagan, or Bush I, or Clinton, or even when Pres Napolean McBatshit first came into power & fired the U.S. Attorneys (listen closely, Debra and all your ilk), their replacements had to be CONFIRMED BY THE SENATE.

In that way, some small bit of oversight could be applied by the Senate to ensure some real nutjobs (think of a U.S. attorney Ann Coulter, gad I about heaved writing that) wouldn't be put in.

The sneak amendment put in by Sen. Spector (maybe he should change the spelling to Spectre), allowed them to do this WITHOUT confirmation. That amendment was only supposed to be for some kind of wacky national emergency when half the Senate has been nuked.

This is why wierdos like me who want to believe in an impartial Federal judiciary process are a tad pissed.

For those pussies who've been trolling here today, I urge you to refute my above points. Please.

Glenn said: 'For anyone who hasn't heard me say this before: at least for me, editing your own writing, particularly immediately after you write it, is quite difficult, because your brain tends to see what you meant to write, and naturally tends to skip over typos.'

You're totally right about proofing your own work (you can check out most of my posts & find typos). I am surprised though that you don't have some other person take a look at your post prior to it going out into the ether. Since, I assume, you get some form of compensation for this I would have thought Salon (or somebody) would require someone other than you to proof it just for typos.

I think it would be a good twist of the knife to list all the good prosecutions made by those fired attorneys over last several years & then ask these administration lackeys 'so this wasn't a priority of the administation? Hmmm.'

They'll either have to say 'no, putting a corrupt congressman in jail was not one of our priorities or no, busting the major interstate meth ring was not one of our priorities' or they'll have to sqirm. I vote for sqirming.

I'm in a big pool here st work ($200.00 to winner) & if I can get UCLA to beat OSU on Monday, then I win it (and I've been trying to win this one for about 18 years). So, your prediction of OSU over UCLA warms the cockles of my heart!

As far as the Billy watch goes, Wes is correct that 'those who think they're in the know' are saying that it's a done deal that Billy is coming up here. An alternate rumor is that Donovan will take the Miami Heat job & John Pelphry will replace him at UF.