PDA

View Full Version : Student Ejected from VA Game



wandalee
01-16-2011, 10:06 AM
During a timeout in the 2nd half of the VA game, 1 of the refs had the officials escort a Duke student from the game. Anyone have any details? I never saw the kid do anything outrageous.

PallasAthena
01-16-2011, 10:37 AM
Joe Ovies' blog on WRAL says that the student ejected had been cursing at a ref, as in "__________."

I did see a ref at the 15:xx time-out approach yellow-shirted security guy and security guy in a suit and ask to have someone removed. It took the crack security team a few tries to find the right kid. Ovies' blog said those remaining in the section (near the lovely young lady in the dramatic Duke-blue dress) got a lecture afterward about language.

Duvall
01-16-2011, 10:51 AM
Joe Ovies' blog on WRAL says that the student ejected had been cursing at a ref, as in "__________."

I did see a ref at the 15:xx time-out approach yellow-shirted security guy and security guy in a suit and ask to have someone removed. It took the crack security team a few tries to find the right kid. Ovies' blog said those remaining in the section (near the lovely young lady in the dramatic Duke-blue dress) got a lecture afterward about language.

In his defense, Jamie Luckie really does [EXPLETIVE DELETED]ing [EXPLETIVE DELECTED].

Jarhead
01-16-2011, 11:01 AM
It appears that we need to bring up Uncle Terry's Avuncular Letter one more time. I can't find my copy, so a little help, please.http://crazietalk.net/ourhouse/images/smilies/45.gif

PallasAthena
01-16-2011, 11:31 AM
AN AVUNCULAR LETTER
January 17, 1984
To My Duke Students:

The enthusiasm of Duke students in Cameron Indoor Stadium during basketball games is legendary, especially at ACC games. That’s great! It is as if we had a sixth man (maybe seventh, eighth, or tenth sometimes) playing on the floor.

But hold a minute — I have a reservation about all that. There is a recognizable line between enthusiasm and cheapness.

It is generally assumed that a person resorting in conversation to profanity and obscenities is short of an adequate vocabulary. That is doubly true in public utterances.

Resorting to the use of obscenities in cheers and chants at ball games indicates a lack of vocabulary, a lack of cleverness, a lack of ideas, a lack of class, and a lack of respect for other people. We are, I am sorry to report, gaining an unequaled reputation as a student body that doesn’t have a touch of class.

I don’t think we need to be crude and obscene to be effectively enthusiastic. We can cheer and taunt with style; that should be the Duke trademark. Crudeness, profanity, and cheapness should not be our reputation — but it is.

I suggest that we change. Talk this matter over in your various residential houses. Think of something clever but clean, devastating but decent, mean but wholesome, witty and forceful but G-rated for television, and try it at the next game.

We have too much going for us as an outstanding university to tolerate the reputation we now have for being so crude and inarticulate that we must resort to profanity and obscenities at ball games.

I hope you will discipline yourselves and your fellow students. This request is in keeping with my commitment to self-government for students. It should not be up to me to enforce proper behavior that signifies the intelligence of Duke students. You should do it. Reprove those who make us all look bad. Shape up your own language.
I hate for us to have the reputation of being stupid.

With best wishes.

Uncle Terry

http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/51538

Jarhead
01-16-2011, 11:42 AM
Thanks, PallasAthena. Tomorrow, that letter will have guided Duke fandom for 27 years. The Crazies need to take it to heart. http://crazietalk.net/ourhouse/images/smilies/6.gif

OZZIE4DUKE
01-16-2011, 11:46 AM
Joe Ovies' blog on WRAL says that the student ejected had been cursing at a ref, as in "__________."

I did see a ref at the 15:xx time-out approach yellow-shirted security guy and security guy in a suit and ask to have someone removed. It took the crack security team a few tries to find the right kid. Ovies' blog said those remaining in the section (near the lovely young lady in the dramatic Duke-blue dress) got a lecture afterward about language.
Let me just say that the student wasn't the only one. It took MAXIMUM RESTRAINT to not let go a whole string of them in the second half. First Josh Hairston get's pushed to the floor in front of the band with no foul called on UVA (well he's a frosh and won't get the calls) but a minute later the same thing happens to Kyle Singler and HE, the senior AA at home doesn't get the call. No, the refs were very poor yesterday.

Devilsfan
01-16-2011, 11:55 AM
I find it extremely disturbing that refs don't object to profanity when it's directed at players like at the Comcast Center but when it's directed at their possible incompetence it's an ejectable offence. I don't think Duke students should stoop to the classless behavior of Maryland students and the like but I think the ACC should stop being so whimpy.

rthomas
01-16-2011, 12:10 PM
Was the letter from Sanford before or after the shoe incident (NC State) and the record album incident (Virginia)?

dukeimac
01-16-2011, 12:11 PM
I find it extremely disturbing that refs don't object to profanity when it's directed at players like at the Comcast Center but when it's directed at their possible incompetence it's an ejectable offence.

To make such as statement has to imply these were the same 3 refs at the Comcast Center, and I would bet they were not. I find it interesting how people want to compare apples to oranges. Also, remember everyone is human, I don't care who they are or what the roles are, a human is a human. If you think they should take whatever is said to them while they are working, let me come to your place of employment and yell some things at you. I would be interested to see if you keep your composure.

Also, just because someone else does it, doesn't make it right. If the fans at Comcast are low life's, do you really want to use their actions as your defense for your actions?

If the Duke fans want to be treated as class acts, then act with class. To hear a Duke student did such as thing tells me I might need to rethink my belief that Duke fans are class acts. IF the Duke fans want to set a class act example, the next time such a thing is happens, they should escort the fan out the doors.

El_Diablo
01-16-2011, 12:20 PM
Luckie is horrible. At least he received an extended "Tattletale! Tattletale!" chant afterwards.

PallasAthena
01-16-2011, 12:25 PM
"Tattletale! Tattletale!"

THAT is the kind of great stuff the Crazies can and do come up with! I loved it.

El_Diablo
01-16-2011, 12:25 PM
To make such as statement has to imply these were the same 3 refs at the Comcast Center, and I would bet they were not. I find it interesting how people want to compare apples to oranges.

Um, not really. It could also imply that they operate under the same rules and work for the same employers, and are thus expected to uphold standards consistently.

OZZIE4DUKE
01-16-2011, 12:35 PM
Um, not really. It could also imply that they operate under the same rules and work for the same employers, and are thus expected to uphold standards consistently.
You expect consistency from venue to venue? We can't get consistency from one end of the court to the other on consecutive plays!

SCMatt33
01-16-2011, 12:49 PM
I find it extremely disturbing that refs don't object to profanity when it's directed at players like at the Comcast Center but when it's directed at their possible incompetence it's an ejectable offence. I don't think Duke students should stoop to the classless behavior of Maryland students and the like but I think the ACC should stop being so whimpy.

The interpretation of the rules can be pretty sketchy when it comes to profane language.

Team followers, as in Rule 4-27, shall not commit an unsportsmanlike
act, including, but not limited to, the following:

a. Using musical instruments, amplified music or artificial noisemakers
while the game is in progress, except timeouts and intermission.
b. Using laser pointers.
c. Throwing debris on the court after officials’ jurisdiction has begun.
d. Delaying the game by preventing the ball from being promptly made
live or by preventing continuous play, such as but not limited to,
followers entering the playing court before the player activity has
been terminated. When the delay does not interfere with play, it shall
be ignored.
e. Using profanity or language that is abusive, vulgar or obscene.
Note 1: Before penalizing a follower(s) of a team for violating Rule
10-2.9, the officials shall have knowledge as to which team’s
follower(s) committed the act.
Note 2: When the misconduct of the follower(s) is extreme or excessive,
such behavior may be penalized by the official requesting home/
contest management to eject from the premises the team follower(s)
involved in the misbehavior. In such a case, a technical foul shall
not be assessed.
PENALTY: Two free throws awarded to the offended team. The
ball shall be put back in play at the point of interruption.

Bench personnel committing an unsportsmanlike act including, but
not limited to, the following:
a. Disrespectfully addressing an official.
b. Attempting to influence an official’s decision.
c. Using profanity or language that is abusive, vulgar or obscene.
d. Taunting or baiting an opponent.
e. Objecting to an official’s decision by rising from the bench or using
gestures.
f. Inciting undesirable crowd reactions.
g. Fighting by bench personnel as in Rule 4-26.
PENALTY: Two free throws shall be awarded to the offended team.
No free throws shall be awarded for double or offsetting
technical fouls. Counts toward the team-foul total. Applies
toward disqualification and ejection except for Art. 2.g,
which is non-applicable toward disqualification since it
leads to automatic ejection.
Since the head coach is responsible for the conduct and
behavior of all bench personnel, when a CLASS A technical
foul (Art.2.a through g) is assessed to an offender, it shall
also be charged to the head coach as a CLASS B technical
foul.

I wanted to point out the similarities between rules regarding bench personnel and "followers" which in another part of the rule book is defined as fans, band members, cheerleaders, and mascots of a team. The two notes in italics are very important. When dealing with followers, an ejection can be used in place of a technical foul. I don't know the specifics of what happened at the game yesterday, but based on what I read, the official could have given the fan a technical foul instead of an ejection. Also note that the wording of the penalty is the same for both bench personnel and followers. Basically, any inappropriate language, regardless of who it is directed at or in what context it was said, is a violation of the rules. If the refs were to call fouls on Maryland fans for chanting "F you," they would also have to call fouls on Coach K for every F bomb, even if it was inside a huddle directed at a players out of frustration. Note 1 for followers is also important as the ref must be able to identify the offender(s). If there is a stadium wide chant, can you really say for sure that there isn't also an opposing fan using inappropriate language. Ejecting an entire stadium is simply not practical and calling technical fouls on fans allows people who have no direct relationship to the team to have an impact on the game and also brings in the possibility of opposing fans disguising themselves to try and get technical fouls called on themselves. I would imagine that it the refs only do something when it is directed at them because those are usually the instances where they are looking at the offender and can specifically identify him/her. You have to be careful what you wish for. If the refs started being "less wimpy" and followed the letter of the law, you'd see a ridiculous number of technical fouls and ejections. Do you think that chanting "Hi _____, you suck!" during UNC intros is not abusive language? Is thrusting and grunting as a free throw distraction not unsportsmanlike conduct? The rules as written do not provide for degree, so it would require the same penalty as cursing. Look at what is happening in the NBA with the new emphasis on protesting calls. It just takes away from the game. Does that mean that any of it is right? Absolutely not, but calling fouls on fans all the time would not improve the game.

El_Diablo
01-16-2011, 01:07 PM
You expect consistency from venue to venue? We can't get consistency from one end of the court to the other on consecutive plays!

No, it was a special type of consistency there. The refs were consistently wrong. ;)

But seriously, I get where Devilsfan is coming from. And SCMatt, I wouldn't mind seeing the refs issue Maryland a warning and then starting T-ing up the team for the coordinated chants of "F--- you [insert name]!" In that case, it's fairly easy to see what team they represent, and it would end it pretty quickly. As for isolated fans who might be disguising themselves or something, refs can simply eject them, as happened yesterday.

4decadedukie
01-16-2011, 01:35 PM
I saw the student walked out by CIS Security (directly in front of my row four bleacher seat), but I did not see or hear any violation, which does NOT suggest that none occurred. With this said, I observed quite a few blatently awful calls by the refs. I certainly do not condone profanity or incivility especially focued at officials, however, I can understand the frustration of an undergraduate-age fan during yesterday's game. I only hope to ACC's referees won't punish Duke for a few games to reinforce the need for appropriate comportment.

Bluedog
01-16-2011, 02:00 PM
It's a lot easier to eject a single offender than to punish an entire student body. Also, students are a lot closer to the action and referees at Cameron than basically any other venue so refs can see and hear what is said to them and by whom a lot easier. So to me this doesn't suggest that it's a widespread use of profanity by the student body but rather a few outliers. We're definitely not even close to Maryland level but have to display more discretion due to the proximity of the students to the refs.

davekay1971
01-16-2011, 02:57 PM
It's a lot easier to eject a single offender than to punish an entire student body. Also, students are a lot closer to the action and referees at Cameron than basically any other venue so refs can see and hear what is said to them and by whom a lot easier. So to me this doesn't suggest that it's a widespread use of profanity by the student body but rather a few outliers. We're definitely not even close to Maryland level but have to display more discretion due to the proximity of the students to the refs.

It's actually quite easy to punish the entire student body, and it's a rule that the ACC should enact. Simply empower the refs to assess the home team with a technical foul if there is excessive vulgarity from the fans. Almost all ACC league games are televised, and parents want to share ACC basketball with their kids. As Maryland has shown, you simply can't rely on individual schools or coaches to discourage vulgar behavior by the fans. The refs giving the opposition 2 shots and the ball, however, might minimize the prevalence of "F U [insert player nname]" and "bullhockey" cheers. It would at least induce guys like Gary Williams to pick up the mic and ask their fans to stop that crap.

SCMatt33
01-16-2011, 03:10 PM
It's actually quite easy to punish the entire student body, and it's a rule that the ACC should enact. Simply empower the refs to assess the home team with a technical foul if there is excessive vulgarity from the fans. Almost all ACC league games are televised, and parents want to share ACC basketball with their kids. As Maryland has shown, you simply can't rely on individual schools or coaches to discourage vulgar behavior by the fans. The refs giving the opposition 2 shots and the ball, however, might minimize the prevalence of "F U [insert player nname]" and "bullhockey" cheers. It would at least induce guys like Gary Williams to pick up the mic and ask their fans to stop that crap.

It would be, because the rules are already in place by the NCAA. The problem is, is that as written, if you punished Maryland fans for saying "F you _____," you would also have to punish Duke fans for saying "Hi ______, you suck!" during UNC, and for grunting and thrusting as a free throw distraction as both are abusive or vulgar. They don't draw a line (nor should they) between the F-word, and other forms of abusive and vulgar actions. Could you get rid of it by punishing fans? Probably, though it would take a long time to completely get rid of it, but I honestly don't want the game on the court affected by actions of fans in the stands who have no official relationship to the basketball program at a school. It would be entirely arbitrary what gets called, and which officials take what remarks seriously. Can you imagine if there was a game where a team gets called for a late foul in a close game, and a group of 30-50 fans start chanting something borderline inappropriate. The ref calls a technical on top which allows the game to be put out of reach. Unless you specifically enumerate and limit the rule to specific words (which would be tough since fans would likely just use rhyming words to replace them) and come up with strict guidelines with the number of fans required to trigger a foul, you can end up with a game that is decided by a ref making a judgment call on a small number of fans. It's not exactly "easy" to implement a rule where the only new thing punished compared to now is Maryland fans chanting "F you."

Devilsfan
01-16-2011, 03:26 PM
I guess I'm too sensitive and in many ways too old fashion. Our "Let's Go Duke!" is Maryland's "F You____!" In this PC world I guess we must repect others traditions and cultures.

4decadedukie
01-16-2011, 03:35 PM
I guess I'm too sensitive and in many ways too old fashion. Our "Let's Go Duke!" is Maryland's "F You____!" In this PC world I guess we must repect others traditions and cultures.

I, too, tend to be rather old fashioned. However -- and I am probably just dense -- I have NO idea what you mean. Could you please elaborate.

burnspbesq
01-16-2011, 03:52 PM
There's a right and a wrong way to yell at officials. The right way was illustrated by the Crazies on my first visit to Cameron, the day Ferry's jersey was retired. I was in the sixth row of the grad student section with my brother, who was at Fuqua at the time. At one point, Lenny Wirtz, who was the trail official at the time, called a foul underneath, six rows in front of us, that he couldn't possibly have seen from where he was. The Crazies responded with "Not your call! Not your call!"

OZZIE4DUKE
01-16-2011, 04:08 PM
It would be, because the rules are already in place by the NCAA. The problem is, is that as written, if you punished Maryland fans for saying "F you _____," you would also have to punish Duke fans for saying "Hi ______, you suck!" during UNC, and for grunting and thrusting as a free throw distraction as both are abusive or vulgar.
By all means get rid of the "you suck". Saying "Hi Joe" is classy and unique to Cameron. Adding the "you suck" to it is just plain stupid and common. As for the grunting and thrusting during free throws, it's neither funny nor distracting, it doesn't work, and I don't know why the grad students still do it. Many Crusties share this opinion. I know. We've discussed it among ourselves many times behind your backs. Literally. ;)

devildeac
01-16-2011, 04:11 PM
Was the letter from Sanford before or after the shoe incident (NC State) and the record album incident (Virginia)?

It was after the Herman Veal incident and just before the unc game that year at CIS. I don't recall the NCSU shoe incident but recall the pinball, underwear, pizza and car incidents. I also don't recall the UVA record incident.

devildeac
01-16-2011, 04:13 PM
In his defense, Jamie Luckie really does [EXPLETIVE DELETED]ing [EXPLETIVE DELECTED].


Let me just say that the student wasn't the only one. It took MAXIMUM RESTRAINT to not let go a whole string of them in the second half. First Josh Hairston get's pushed to the floor in front of the band with no foul called on UVA (well he's a frosh and won't get the calls) but a minute later the same thing happens to Kyle Singler and HE, the senior AA at home doesn't get the call. No, the refs were very poor yesterday.

Agreed and agreed. Remember the Gerald Henderson flagrant/fighting foul?

devildeac
01-16-2011, 04:14 PM
You expect consistency from venue to venue? We can't get consistency from one end of the court to the other on consecutive plays!

Ruh-roh. There's that "consistency" word again...
:rolleyes:

DukeGirl4ever
01-16-2011, 04:25 PM
There's a right and a wrong way to yell at officials. The right way was illustrated by the Crazies on my first visit to Cameron, the day Ferry's jersey was retired. I was in the sixth row of the grad student section with my brother, who was at Fuqua at the time. At one point, Lenny Wirtz, who was the trail official at the time, called a foul underneath, six rows in front of us, that he couldn't possibly have seen from where he was. The Crazies responded with "Not your call! Not your call!"

I also thought this was pretty clever....

OZZIE4DUKE
01-16-2011, 04:32 PM
I also thought this was pretty clever....
I love that sign! Did anyone make them erase it? Were they warned?

rthomas
01-16-2011, 04:33 PM
It was after the Herman Veal incident and just before the unc game that year at CIS. I don't recall the NCSU shoe incident but recall the pinball, underwear, pizza and car incidents. I also don't recall the UVA record incident.

The shoe incident came after the NCAA found out that Valvano's team had been selling their game shoes. The Crazies all brought extra shoes and during the introductions for the State game, all the shoes were thrown in a pile out on the floor. My adviser had a picture of them and the pile was substantial.

The UVA record incident came after someone on the Cavs (I can't remember who on the Cavs) got busted for breaking in to a student's dorm room and stealing a stereo. The crazies did the same thing: during intros out came the records onto the floor.

DukeGirl4ever
01-16-2011, 04:35 PM
I love that sign! Did anyone make them erase it? Were they warned?


IIRC, that sign was from last year's Wake game, which was a blood bath!

I saw the picture after the game and shared it on Facebook with my Duke friends.
I've never been to Cameron in my 31 years of life, so I have no idea what happened with that sign.
Cameron is on my bucket list....I hope I can get there one day if my work schedule allows it!

DU82
01-16-2011, 04:38 PM
It was after the Herman Veal incident and just before the unc game that year at CIS. I don't recall the NCSU shoe incident but recall the pinball, underwear, pizza and car incidents. I also don't recall the UVA record incident.

The shoes were in Valvano's last season, after it got out that some players sold their extra basketball shoes. The record incident was also State, not Virginia, after Chris Washburn "borrowed" a teammate's portable stereo. (That one happened first.)

dukeimac
01-16-2011, 04:49 PM
Well, I have yet to find many people who are "consistent" in their own lives. Yet they get pretty critical of others who they feel are not "consistent."

Be careful, before you can be critical of others you better be pretty consistent yourself.

Thus, I will be looking for you the next time you suit up to ref a game.

uh_no
01-16-2011, 04:58 PM
I love that sign! Did anyone make them erase it? Were they warned?

It was there til halftime, and then they put something else on it

OZZIE4DUKE
01-16-2011, 04:58 PM
Well, I have yet to find many people who are "consistent" in their own lives. Yet they get pretty critical of others who they feel are not "consistent."

Be careful, before you can be critical of others you better be pretty consistent yourself.

Thus, I will be looking for you the next time you suit up to ref a game.
The last game I reffed was in intramurals, circa 1975 or '76. My general rule for blowing the whistle - no blood, no foul! I was pretty consistent.

davekay1971
01-16-2011, 05:03 PM
It would be, because the rules are already in place by the NCAA. The problem is, is that as written, if you punished Maryland fans for saying "F you _____," you would also have to punish Duke fans for saying "Hi ______, you suck!" during UNC, and for grunting and thrusting as a free throw distraction as both are abusive or vulgar. ."

I get your point, and while it wouldn't be a perfect solution, the rule could be written to be specific about what is punishable. Racial and sexual slurs, certain specific curse words, etc. As a parent, my own solution to the issue is to let my kids watch (and listen) and explain situations as they come up. Even bad examples can be used as teaching points. However, as an increasingly old fuddy duddy, I think it would also be a useful lesson to teach "fans" that they're actions are clearly visible and audible to a broad group of people (ie: the kids in the stands as well as those at home), and that if they don't have the basic courtesy to keep that in mind, the powers that be in charge of their entertainment (the league) will crack their knuckles accordingly.

Papa John
01-16-2011, 05:24 PM
Was the letter from Sanford before or after the shoe incident (NC State) and the record album incident (Virginia)?

The record album incident was actually NC State... The shower of records was for Chris Washburn, who had been caught stealing a stereo.

My favorite was the junk food shower for Dennis Scott in 1990. He had shed 20 pounds going into his junior year and went on a scoring tear. A nice touch of humor. Unfortunately, didn't work. He torched us for 30+ that game, if I recall correctly...

devildeac
01-16-2011, 05:29 PM
The shoe incident came after the NCAA found out that Valvano's team had been selling their game shoes. The Crazies all brought extra shoes and during the introductions for the State game, all the shoes were thrown in a pile out on the floor. My adviser had a picture of them and the pile was substantial.

The UVA record incident came after someone on the Cavs (I can't remember who on the Cavs) got busted for breaking in to a student's dorm room and stealing a stereo. The crazies did the same thing: during intros out came the records onto the floor.

I seem to remember record album covers also being thrown onto the CIS floor for one of the long line of "distinguished" NCSU miscreants who had been cited for shoplifting (changing prices?) on record albums or was it stealing a stereo too, in the 70s. Or is my CRS syndrome flaring up again?:confused:

OldPhiKap
01-16-2011, 08:15 PM
The record album incident was actually NC State... The shower of records was for Chris Washburn, who had been caught stealing a stereo.



"Lo, Co, Stereo! Lo, Co, Stereo!"

dukeimac
01-16-2011, 09:18 PM
The last game I reffed was in intramurals, circa 1975 or '76. My general rule for blowing the whistle - no blood, no foul! I was pretty consistent.

That is your opinion. Lets ask the players and fans...

redick4pres
01-16-2011, 09:30 PM
Let's just put it this way...that same official who had the student ejected made one call in the first 39 mins of the game that went in favor of Duke. I'm not trying to start anything about cheating or him not liking Duke or Coach K, but my wife and I both kept count and he made EVERY call AGAINST Duke for 39 mins (except one in the first half). I'll just leave it at that...

Saratoga2
01-16-2011, 09:55 PM
You expect consistency from venue to venue? We can't get consistency from one end of the court to the other on consecutive plays!

It would take some effort to clear much of the student section in Maryland to stop similar language.

OZZIE4DUKE
01-16-2011, 11:17 PM
That is your opinion. Lets ask the players and fans...
Well, if devildeac was there he was a player and not a fan, and even he never complained, so I must have done OK. :cool:

diveonthefloor
01-17-2011, 08:36 AM
Jamie Luckie either had a really bad game officiating, or..... nah I can't even think that.

77devil
01-17-2011, 09:03 AM
The last game I reffed was in intramurals, circa 1975 or '76. My general rule for blowing the whistle - no blood, no foul! I was pretty consistent.

Oh, so you are the reason Ozzie that I got all those bruises

Turtleboy
01-17-2011, 09:35 AM
The interpretation of the rules can be pretty sketchy when it comes to profane language.

Team followers, as in Rule 4-27, shall not commit an unsportsmanlike
act, including, but not limited to, the following:

a. Using musical instruments, amplified music or artificial noisemakers
while the game is in progress, except timeouts and intermission.What in the world is an artificial noisemaker?

94duke
01-17-2011, 09:40 AM
What in the world is an artificial noisemaker?

Air-horn?
http://i261.photobucket.com/albums/ii60/BossTalon001/Gorilla%20stuff/300px-Airhorn.png

sagegrouse
01-17-2011, 09:47 AM
What in the world is an artificial noisemaker?

The cause celebre about artificial noisemakers was the Mississippi State cowbells, which were traditional at football and basketball games. When the NCAA changed the rules in the 1960's, the students would then yell, "Ding-dong, dammit, ding-dong!" whenever the situation called for a cowbell.

The Babe McCarthy teams of that era were pretty good (Bailey Howell, etc.). It was one of his teams that had to sneak out of state in 1963 to play in the NCAA tourney because of prohibitions of Mississippi state law against integration.

sagegrouse
'If you have to be called a "cow college," what's wrong with using cowbells?'

devildeac
01-17-2011, 09:49 AM
Air-horn?
http://i261.photobucket.com/albums/ii60/BossTalon001/Gorilla%20stuff/300px-Airhorn.png

Wow. That looks like Ozzie's old retired air horn:cool:.

I wonder if he ever got Lefty to autograph it...

Turtleboy
01-17-2011, 09:59 AM
The cause celebre about artificial noisemakers was the Mississippi State cowbells, which were traditional at football and basketball games. When the NCAA changed the rules in the 1960's, the students would then yell, "Ding-dong, dammit, ding-dong!" whenever the situation called for a cowbell.

The Babe McCarthy teams of that era were pretty good (Bailey Howell, etc.). It was one of his teams that had to sneak out of state in 1963 to play in the NCAA tourney because of prohibitions of Mississippi state law against integration.

sagegrouse
'If you have to be called a "cow college," what's wrong with using cowbells?'What's artificial about the noise made by striking a cow bell? It seems to me that for something to be classified as an artificial noisemaker, artificial noise would have to exist. The concept is incoherent to me.

OZZIE4DUKE
01-17-2011, 10:02 AM
What in the world is an artificial noisemaker?
This is mine, as seen and heard in Cameron Indoor Stadium in row 4 behind the visiting bench during the 1974, 1975 and 1976 seasons. :cool: You can still see the price tag from Durham Sporting Goods from the last time I bought an air cannister refill for $2.40! I bought many during those three seasons! Clemson coach Tates Locke absolutely hated me! Lefty and I came to an "understanding". I'll just leave it at that...

BTW, it still works. My wife used it into the telephone a couple of years ago on a telephone solicitor who wouldn't quit calling ... until then.

Turtleboy
01-17-2011, 10:03 AM
This is mine, as seen and heard in Cameron Indoor Stadium in row 4 behind the visiting bench during the 1974, 1975 and 1976 seasons. :cool:What's artificial about the noise it produces?

OZZIE4DUKE
01-17-2011, 10:08 AM
Wow. That looks like Ozzie's old retired air horn:cool:.

I wonder if he ever got Lefty to autograph it...
Next time I meet him :cool:

sagegrouse
01-17-2011, 10:09 AM
What's artificial about the noise made by striking a cow bell? It seems to me that for something to be classified as an artificial noisemaker, artificial noise would have to exist. The concept is incoherent to me.

You are as much a city boy as I am. A cowbell has the clanger built in and, in James Bond fashion, is shaken not struck.

OTOH I agree with your sentiment about "incoherent." It probably means that the reference is authentic. Isn't "incoherence" a requirement when writing regs for the NCAA?

sagegrouse

94duke
01-17-2011, 10:13 AM
What's artificial about the noise made by striking a cow bell? It seems to me that for something to be classified as an artificial noisemaker, artificial noise would have to exist. The concept is incoherent to me.

A cowbell is an instrument (Don't Fear the Reaper), so it is prohibited.

Turtleboy
01-17-2011, 10:15 AM
You are as much a city boy as I am. A cowbell has the clanger built in and, in James Bond fashion, is shaken not struck.Don't tell Blue Oyster Cult. (http://www.buzzhumor.com/videos/28180/More_Cowbell):)


OTOH I agree with your sentiment about "incoherent." It probably means that the reference is authentic. Isn't "incoherence" a requirement when writing regs for the NCAA?Fair enough.

Turtleboy
01-17-2011, 10:17 AM
A cowbell is an instrument (Don't Fear the Reaper), so it is prohibited.sagegrouse's isn't.

lpd1982
01-17-2011, 10:46 AM
There could be no better fan than the aforementioned student who has done MUCH for our team. And when another student was about to take the long walk, the ejected student stepped up to take the hit. Bleeds blue in my opinion.

Indoor66
01-17-2011, 10:48 AM
What's artificial about the noise made by striking a cow bell? It seems to me that for something to be classified as an artificial noisemaker, artificial noise would have to exist. The concept is incoherent to me.

Is that like a tree in the woods with no one there?

Devil in the Blue Dress
01-17-2011, 10:49 AM
The cause celebre about artificial noisemakers was the Mississippi State cowbells, which were traditional at football and basketball games. When the NCAA changed the rules in the 1960's, the students would then yell, "Ding-dong, dammit, ding-dong!" whenever the situation called for a cowbell.

The Babe McCarthy teams of that era were pretty good (Bailey Howell, etc.). It was one of his teams that had to sneak out of state in 1963 to play in the NCAA tourney because of prohibitions of Mississippi state law against integration.

sagegrouse
'If you have to be called a "cow college," what's wrong with using cowbells?'

If I may add to this background: my birthday gift one year was seats on the 40 for a Texas - Arkansas game in Austin back when they were in the same conference. The Tea Sippers had cowbells, too, and used them.

One heard lots of cowbells at high school football games in this part of the southeast back in the fifties.

Cowbells were long associated with football before being set aside by some rules.

duke79
01-17-2011, 10:49 AM
I hate to be a law nerd, but my Duke Law education makes me wonder if the university actually has the right, under the First Amendment to the US Constitution, to forcibly remove a student from the arena for a mere verbal expression of his (or her) displeasure (no matter "obscene" that verbal displeasure may be to some people) with the objectivity and fairness of the one of the referees. I think a strong case can be made that the university does NOT have that right. See the article linked below written by a law professor in which he discusses these issues, specifically referring to the use of profanity by the U of Maryland fans in the games against Duke.

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/speech/pubcollege/topic.aspx?topic=fan_profanitye.

OZZIE4DUKE
01-17-2011, 10:52 AM
I hate to be a law nerd, but my Duke Law education makes me wonder if the university actually has the right, under the First Amendment to the US Constitution, to forcibly remove a student from the arena for a mere verbal expression of his (or her) displeasure (no matter "obscene" that verbal displeasure may be to some people) with the objectivity and fairness of the one of the referees. I think a strong case can be made that the university does NOT have that right. See the article linked below written by a law professor in which he discusses these issues, specifically referring to the use of profanity by the U of Maryland fans in the games against Duke.

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/speech/pubcollege/topic.aspx?topic=fan_profanitye.
No record was found at that link.

CameronBornAndBred
01-17-2011, 11:02 AM
I hate to be a law nerd, but my Duke Law education makes me wonder if the university actually has the right, under the First Amendment to the US Constitution, to forcibly remove a student from the arena for a mere verbal expression of his (or her) displeasure (no matter "obscene" that verbal displeasure may be to some people) with the objectivity and fairness of the one of the referees.


UVA thinks that schools have that right. Remember the signs?
http://sports.espn.go.com/espnmag/story?id=3566872

4decadedukie
01-17-2011, 11:02 AM
I hate to be a law nerd, but my Duke Law education makes me wonder if the university actually has the right, under the First Amendment to the US Constitution, to forcibly remove a student from the arena for a mere verbal expression of his (or her) displeasure (no matter "obscene" that verbal displeasure may be to some people) with the objectivity and fairness of the one of the referees. I think a strong case can be made that the university does NOT have that right. See the article linked below written by a law professor in which he discusses these issues, specifically referring to the use of profanity by the U of Maryland fans in the games against Duke.

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/speech/pubcollege/topic.aspx?topic=fan_profanitye.

Duke University is not public property. The institution -- with governance vested in the Trustees and delegated to Duke's leadership, faculty and staff -- has the right to exclude individuals on an essentially arbitrary basis, does it not? Fundamentally, this does not differ from my right to exclude any person from my private property for basically any reason (including, my disagreement with the ways in which or the messages conveyed utilizing their "free speech" rights).

4decadedukie
01-17-2011, 11:06 AM
This is mine, as seen and heard in Cameron Indoor Stadium in row 4 behind the visiting bench during the 1974, 1975 and 1976 seasons. :cool: You can still see the price tag from Durham Sporting Goods from the last time I bought an air cannister refill for $2.40! I bought many during those three seasons! Clemson coach Tates Locke absolutely hated me! Lefty and I came to an "understanding". I'll just leave it at that...

BTW, it still works. My wife used it into the telephone a couple of years ago on a telephone solicitor who wouldn't quit calling ... until then.


For everyone’s' interest, I attended a game in CIS (I believe last year) where Coach K had a spectator ejected for using one of those loud "Viking Horn" noise makers.

Kdogg
01-17-2011, 11:08 AM
I hate to be a law nerd, but my Duke Law education makes me wonder if the university actually has the right, under the First Amendment to the US Constitution, to forcibly remove a student from the arena for a mere verbal expression of his (or her) displeasure (no matter "obscene" that verbal displeasure may be to some people) with the objectivity and fairness of the one of the referees. I think a strong case can be made that the university does NOT have that right. See the article linked below written by a law professor in which he discusses these issues, specifically referring to the use of profanity by the U of Maryland fans in the games against Duke.

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/speech/pubcollege/topic.aspx?topic=fan_profanitye.

Cameron is private property while Comcast is a pubic facility. The first amendment protects individuals from Congress (and by extension the states) passing laws to restrict speech. It does not stop the owner of private property restricting speech (or the press, or religon, or assemble) on his property. This is not like Roy getting the Presbyterian fan thrown out of the game last year. That may be a legal case.


Duke University is not public property. The institution -- with governance vested in the Trustees and delegated to Duke's leadership, faculty and staff -- has the right to exclude individuals on an essentially arbitrary basis, does it not? .

As private property open to the public they can not exclude because of race, religion, gender or creed. But other than that yeah.

4decadedukie
01-17-2011, 11:22 AM
As private property open to the public they can not exclude because of race, religion, gender or creed. But other than that yeah.

Thanks; I agree (and I should have added that well-understood caveat, although it is not especially relevant to this situation).

sagegrouse
01-17-2011, 11:40 AM
I hate to be a law nerd, but my Duke Law education makes me wonder if the university actually has the right, under the First Amendment to the US Constitution, to forcibly remove a student from the arena for a mere verbal expression of his (or her) displeasure (no matter "obscene" that verbal displeasure may be to some people) with the objectivity and fairness of the one of the referees. I think a strong case can be made that the university does NOT have that right. See the article linked below written by a law professor in which he discusses these issues, specifically referring to the use of profanity by the U of Maryland fans in the games against Duke.

http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/speech/pubcollege/topic.aspx?topic=fan_profanitye.

My recommendation to both the Maryland and Duke administrations is to eject the students (or deny entry for those wearing obscene signs on their clothing) and let the students figure out how to raise money to hire a lawyer to prosecute a first amendment case. Not to be a curmudgeon, although the shirt probably fits, but I learned in government that you didn't ask your lawyer "whether" you could do something -- the general counsel's offices love to make policy -- but "how" you could do something.

sagegrouse

Turtleboy
01-17-2011, 04:45 PM
Is that like a tree in the woods with no one there?It's like a tree in the woods with a Cylon there. Artificial people hear artificial noise.

All kidding aside, I wonder why they didn't simply ban noisemakers. Why do they care if the noise is "artificial" or not?

Indoor66
01-17-2011, 05:15 PM
It's like a tree in the woods with a Cylon there. Artificial people hear artificial noise.

All kidding aside, I wonder why they didn't simply ban noisemakers. Why do they care if the noise is "artificial" or not?

I agree with you. Ban all noisemakers. If you want to know the truth, I wanted Ozzie banned in the 70's with that horn. I felt it was totally inappropriate then and still do today. (I had no idea it was Ozzie then. It was just some jerk of a fan - at that time.)

-jk
01-17-2011, 06:05 PM
It's like a tree in the woods with a Cylon there. Artificial people hear artificial noise.

All kidding aside, I wonder why they didn't simply ban noisemakers. Why do they care if the noise is "artificial" or not?

I think they were trying to define the distinction between human generated noise (clapping and yelling) and noise made with assistance (cowbells, air horns, etc.).

But why are male cheerleaders allowed to use megaphones during action? And even bang them on the floor? And yet the band can't play? (oh, right - it's the NCAA.)

-jk

CameronBornAndBred
01-17-2011, 06:19 PM
I think they were trying to define the distinction between human generated noise (clapping and yelling) and noise made with assistance (cowbells, air horns, etc.).

But why are male cheerleaders allowed to use megaphones during action? And even bang them on the floor? And yet the band can't play? (oh, right - it's the NCAA.)

-jk
At a basketball game? They aren't..all the cheerleaders sit on the sidelines, quietly. At football games the megaphones are directed towards the stands, not the field.

Acymetric
01-17-2011, 07:43 PM
At a basketball game? They aren't..all the cheerleaders sit on the sidelines, quietly. At football games the megaphones are directed towards the stands, not the field.

At Duke. Cheerleaders, at least at some schools, do use megaphones and lead cheers during play.

CameronBornAndBred
01-17-2011, 08:26 PM
At Duke. Cheerleaders, at least at some schools, do use megaphones and lead cheers during play.
Did not know that, I've never seen it from an ACC team on tv..but I'm usually watching the action. Somebody must have some real boring basketball if they need cheerleaders to generate crowd reaction during play.

Cicero
01-17-2011, 08:30 PM
Comcast is a pubic facility.

Best description of Comcast EVER.

OZZIE4DUKE
01-17-2011, 08:35 PM
I agree with you. Ban all noisemakers. If you want to know the truth, I wanted Ozzie banned in the 70's with that horn. I felt it was totally inappropriate then and still do today. (I had no idea it was Ozzie then. It was just some jerk of a fan - at that time.)
Indoor, the folks sitting near me weren't too thrilled with me either at first. I had to replace my first air horn sophomore year because one of my frat brothers stole it. But they only did it once; they realized I was not resource limited and Durham Sporting Goods wasn't short of inventory, and they sort of got into the havoc it wrought on the opposing team's concentration during time outs, not to mention the headaches it gave them :cool:

Kfanarmy
01-18-2011, 04:42 PM
What's artificial about the noise made by striking a cow bell? It seems to me that for something to be classified as an artificial noisemaker, artificial noise would have to exist. The concept is incoherent to me.

"Noisemaker" as written would be one word, one noun. "Artificial" then modifies "noisemaker"...the thing making the noise, not the noise itself. It is a coherent use of the adjective and verb.

When next you see a natural cow bell, you'll have a case.

I have heard a few different natural air horns, but that's a different and probably too-colorful conversation for this thread.

uh_no
01-18-2011, 07:25 PM
I hate to be a law nerd, but my Duke Law education makes me wonder if the university actually has the right, under the First Amendment to the US Constitution...

This is a huge misconception of the bill of rights....the amendment starts "Congress shall make no law....."

nowhere does it say anything about states, local governments, etc....now the right has been extended via the 14th amendment....but there is no 'free speech' in a private setting.....

EDIT: I'll probably get lectured about the correctness of this post by someone more knowledgeable than I.....it happens

El_Diablo
01-18-2011, 08:26 PM
This is a huge misconception of the bill of rights....the amendment starts "Congress shall make no law....."

nowhere does it say anything about states, local governments, etc....now the right has been extended via the 14th amendment....but there is no 'free speech' in a private setting.....

EDIT: I'll probably get lectured about the correctness of this post by someone more knowledgeable than I.....it happens


No, the Bill of Rights is not limited to Congress only. This was one of the concerns the founders had in enacting the Bill of Rights...that people would come to see the assertion of certain individual rights, or the specific wording of those asserted rights, as the outer limits on individual liberty. Simply put, just because Congress cannot do something does not mean the other branches are then free to do it. The principles protected by the Bill of Rights are fundamental rights and thus apply to any federal action, and most provisions (through the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment) to any state action. (I say "most" because a select few provisions--such as the quartering of soldiers--have never been effectively challenged in court against a state).

El_Diablo
01-18-2011, 08:57 PM
Although I guess your overall point is that it doesn't apply to private actors...which is mostly right (subject to the limitations already listed by Kdogg).

El_Diablo
01-18-2011, 09:27 PM
Although I guess your overall point is that it doesn't apply to private actors...which is mostly right (subject to the limitations already listed by Kdogg).

And another caveat: states can pass laws creating more expansive personal rights than those granted in the Bill of Rights and thus can overcome the ability of private actors to restrict free speech on private property. For example, the California constitution extends free speech protections to private property held open to the public, such as shopping malls. So theoretically, NC could probably enact a statute that prohibits the suppression of protected speech in places such as Cameron.

anon
01-18-2011, 10:06 PM
And another caveat: states can pass laws creating more expansive personal rights than those granted in the Bill of Rights and thus can overcome the ability of private actors to restrict free speech on private property. For example, the California constitution extends free speech protections to private property held open to the public, such as shopping malls. So theoretically, NC could probably enact a statute that prohibits the suppression of protected speech in places such as Cameron.

I am not familiar with that law, but I feel like you might be misinterpreting "free speech." Free speech is shorthand for the concept that the government cannot impede on your right to free speech. It does not say anything about a private establishment throwing you out if you don't follow their (possibly arbitrary) rules.

OZZIE4DUKE
01-18-2011, 10:09 PM
I am not familiar with that law, but I feel like you might be misinterpreting "free speech." Free speech is shorthand for the concept that the government cannot impede on your right to free speech. It does not say anything about a private establishment throwing you out if you don't follow their (possibly arbitrary) rules.
Don't yell fire in a theater. You'll get tossed out. I don't care what state you're in. Unless, of course, it's on fire.

anon
01-18-2011, 10:29 PM
I am not familiar with that law, but I feel like you might be misinterpreting "free speech." Free speech is shorthand for the concept that the government cannot impede on your right to free speech. It does not say anything about a private establishment throwing you out if you don't follow their (possibly arbitrary) rules.

And with the wide interpretation of "speech" these days (see: Citizens United case, flag burning, etc.), that would mean you pretty much lose all control over your private space.

El_Diablo
01-18-2011, 10:49 PM
I am not familiar with that law, but I feel like you might be misinterpreting "free speech." Free speech is shorthand for the concept that the government cannot impede on your right to free speech. It does not say anything about a private establishment throwing you out if you don't follow their (possibly arbitrary) rules.

You can read about it here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruneyard_Shopping_Center_v._Robins

El_Diablo
01-18-2011, 11:04 PM
that would mean you pretty much lose all control over your private space.

Not really. I don't think NC would go as far as California in creating affirmative free speech rights, but in theory the state could do it. But even in that unlikely scenario, there's a big difference between "private space" (like a home) and "quasi-public space" (like a mall, and possibly a sports arena). The different considerations in each setting would mean that the application of any affirmative free speech right would not--and need not--be uniform.

Edit: As a case in point, California courts have refused to extend the right into private apartment complexes. So even there, the slope is not as slippery as you might think.

anon
01-18-2011, 11:17 PM
Not really. I don't think NC would go as far as California in creating affirmative free speech rights, but in theory the state could do it. But even in that unlikely scenario, there's a big difference between "private space" (like a home) and "quasi-public space" (like a mall, and possibly a sports arena). The different considerations in each setting would mean that the application of any affirmative free speech right would not--and need not--be uniform.

Edit: As a case in point, California courts have refused to extend the right into private apartment complexes. So even there, the slope is not as slippery as you might think.

I just educated myself on the slightly different "free speech" right in California… thanks for the pointer. You are right that there is no way that would pass, at least in that form, in North Carolina. I'll withhold my personal political comment though.

<http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/California_Constitution/ARTICLE_I>, section 2

El_Diablo
01-18-2011, 11:30 PM
I just educated myself on the slightly different "free speech" right in California… thanks for the pointer. You are right that there is no way that would pass, at least in that form, in North Carolina. I'll withhold my personal political comment though.

<http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/California_Constitution/ARTICLE_I>, section 2

Several other states have reached similar conclusions in state-level free speech rights cases involving malls or shopping centers: New Jersey, Washington, Oregon, Colorado, and Massachusetts. There may be others too.

I'm not aware of any that have applied it to sports arenas, but New Jersey applied it to a private university (Princeton).