HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Los Angeles Kings
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

What good are timeouts if you dont use them

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-20-2011, 02:18 AM
  #1
DIEHARD the King fan
Registered User
 
DIEHARD the King fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: blueline to slot
Country: United States
Posts: 6,244
vCash: 500
What good are timeouts if you dont use them

The Kings are up by 4 goals in the second period and here come the Sharks. They score two goals and no timeout is called. They score their third goal and I'm thinking TM's going to us it now, he's got to break the momentum and get his team settled down. He doesnt and Stoll makes his best play of the game threading a beauty to Smyth who nets another for a 5-3 lead. Maybe I was wrong, and TM knows best.

But then the Kings give up goal, number 4, and even the squirt from the local ice rink is yelling for TM to call a timeout. Settle the team down, restore some order actually coach.

But NO. Tailspin Terry is too dumbstruck to attempt to actually coach his team at that point. That would require action on his part and take away that stoic look he practices throughtout game time. No, he'd rather save that time out, for maybe Summer or Easter sunday. Hell, maybe he thinks he can pile up all the saved timeouts from throughout the season, put them together and acquire an extra day of road per diem pay.

BUT HE CANT EVER SEEM TO USE ONE WHEN ITS NEEDED,AND WE MOST CERTAINLY NEEDED ONE AFTER GOAL FOUR. But timeouts require coaching and TM is just not big on that kinda stuff.

EDIT: Add

Quote:

(on the possibility of calling timeout or changing goalies…)
MURRAY: “No, I wasn’t thinking about changing goalies. The goals are far apart. The two at the end of the period are the only ones that are close. They scored on a power play in there. We come right back and make it a 5-3 game. We have plenty of TV timeouts to talk about the stuff I just talked about with you right no, which we were doing. The attention was there but we, for some reason, refused to do what we were supposed to do.”
His lack of logic is obvious and excruciatingly painful. The man is an idiot. I rest my case.


Last edited by DIEHARD the King fan: 04-20-2011 at 02:37 AM.
DIEHARD the King fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 02:40 AM
  #2
Fingolfin
Registered User
 
Fingolfin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 468
vCash: 500
My buddy and I both agreed that he should have called a timeout in the 2nd, following an icing call that capped an excessively long shift trapped in their own zone. Of course, no timeout was called, and the Sharks won the ensuing face-off and scored their first goal.

If you ask me, the Kings lost this game because they were completely out-coached in the 2nd period.

Fingolfin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 02:47 AM
  #3
Nex06
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,104
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fingolfin View Post
My buddy and I both agreed that he should have called a timeout in the 2nd
Ok, so that does it. Case closed. Another opinion would not be possible at this point.


(My opinion, as somebody might have guessed is, that saying Kings lost because TM didn't call the TO is ridiculous; timeouts are not magic wands, they don't miraculously turn mentally defeated team into a Stanley Cup winner)

Nex06 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 02:50 AM
  #4
RonSwanson*
Gadfly
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Food 'N Stuff
Country: United States
Posts: 8,769
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nex06 View Post
Ok, so that does it. Case closed. Another opinion would not be possible at this point.


(My opinion, as somebody might have guessed is, that saying Kings lost because TM didn't call the TO is ridiculous; timeouts are not magic wands, they don't miraculously turn mentally defeated team into a Stanley Cup winner)
If you're gonna be an ass, you should realize that the post you quoted did not actually blame the loss on Murray not calling a timeout.

RonSwanson* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 04:10 AM
  #5
kingsholygrail
You Face Jaraxxus!
 
kingsholygrail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Derpifornia
Country: United States
Posts: 51,595
vCash: 500
I've never seen a coach so afraid to use a timeout.

kingsholygrail is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 04:31 AM
  #6
s3machine*
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Hyphy, CA
Country: Armenia
Posts: 465
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=Terry Murray;32516834]
(on the possibility of calling timeout or changing goalies…)
MURRAY: “No, I wasn’t thinking about changing goalies. The goals are far apart. The two at the end of the period are the only ones that are close. They scored on a power play in there. We come right back and make it a 5-3 game. We have plenty of TV timeouts to talk about the stuff I just talked about with you right no, which we were doing. The attention was there but we, for some reason, refused to do what we were supposed to do.”QUOTE]

5 goals in 17 minutes are far apart?

Terry.. I really hope you are reading this.. you are a moron. you do more harm than good. your coaching strategies are extinct.. much like your job will be if you keep up your ********.

Hang em up already pal.. you owe it to this franchise to quit holding them back from taking that next step into serious success.

You will never, ever win the Stanley Cup. You are not talented enough.. and to be honest.. you are borderline senile.

now get the steppin.

s3machine* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 09:01 AM
  #7
DIEHARD the King fan
Registered User
 
DIEHARD the King fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: blueline to slot
Country: United States
Posts: 6,244
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nex06 View Post
Ok, so that does it. Case closed. Another opinion would not be possible at this point.


(My opinion, as somebody might have guessed is, that saying Kings lost because TM didn't call the TO is ridiculous; timeouts are not magic wands, they don't miraculously turn mentally defeated team into a Stanley Cup winner)
So when exactly do YOU decide to use a timeout?

My opinion, as somebody might have guessed is: Sometime during a five goal outburst by your opponent in a single period, just might be a DAMN GOOD TIME to try to break the momentum, settle your team down and actually try to be a coach, rather than stand passively behind the bench with a frightened, constipated look on your (his -- TM's) face.

Sure Terry Murray didnt blow coverage on the ice, although he has put Handzus and Penner (slow and SLOWER) together for several games now and they have. And no, he didnt fail to stop those shots to the net. But those things are not his job. His job is to coach. What I saw last night, now that I know this morning that it wasnt an actual sleep state nightmare (BUT IT WAS A NIGHTMARE NONETHELESS) wasn't coaching. That was horrid failure by a person who holds the coaching position.

The guy is a turd.

Even Crow would have called one.

This team has to win in spite of their coach!


-----------------------------------------------------------------

I'm going to try to follow my brethren's advice, put this game behind me and recoup my voice for tomorrow night.

We are KING FANS.
We have tasted failure before.
We swallow it down like bitter herbs.
We are hardened to it.
It nourishes our souls.
We have been down and we will rise again.
We will not falter in our support.
We will not sit meekly by.
We will cheer.
We will yell .
We will be loud.
We will play our role, as the seventh man must.
WE ARE KINGS FANS.
LET THE WORLD KNOW



Go KINGS GO!!!


Go KINGS GO!!!


Go KINGS GO!!!


Go KINGS GO!!!


Go KINGS GO!!!


Last edited by DIEHARD the King fan: 04-20-2011 at 09:13 AM.
DIEHARD the King fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 09:03 AM
  #8
kingsholygrail
You Face Jaraxxus!
 
kingsholygrail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Derpifornia
Country: United States
Posts: 51,595
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DIEHARD the King fan View Post
So when exactly do YOU decide to use a timeout?

my opinion: Sometime during a five goal outburst by your opponent just might be a DAMN GOOD TIME to try to break the momentum, settle your team down and actually try to be a coach.

Sure Terry Murray didnt bow coverage on the ice, although he has put Handzus and Penner (slow and SLOWER) together for several games now. And no he didnt fail to stop those shots to the net. But those things are not his job. His job is to coach. What I saw last night, now that I know it wasnt an actual sleep state nightmare (BUT IT WAS A NIGHTMARE NONETHELESS) wasn't coaching. That was horrid failure by a person who holds the coaching position.

The guy is a turd.

Even Crow would have called one.
He has a very hands off approach to coaching and that would be quite a bit better suited to an experienced well oiled team that would not need the timeout or prodding from the coach to perform in difficult situations, but this team is not well greased. It has veterans, but its core is anything but.

Even Babcock with the 20 years post season appearance Red Wings calls a damn timeout when things get dicey.

kingsholygrail is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 09:41 AM
  #9
Butch 19
King me
 
Butch 19's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Geographical Oddity
Country: United States
Posts: 9,997
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fingolfin View Post
If you ask me, the Kings lost this game because they were completely out-coached in the 2nd period.
No, they lost because after they had a 4-0 lead, they thought they could coast to an easy win.

Everyone started missing assignments & playing responsibly.

When it was tied 5-5, they played on eggshells - and really who wouldn't? you just blew a 4-0 lead!

Butch 19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 09:48 AM
  #10
kingsfan
#SutterforanOscar
 
kingsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manitoba, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,421
vCash: 500
It's most definately not all TM's fault, but he was the worse part of the Kings collapse last night. I don't expect him to be able to stop a rally like that, but I expect him to try and do SOMETHING to stop a rally like that. He did nothing, not even changing up the lines from what I recall. Not blaming anything on any particular player, but when another team has momentum and one line is struggling, you don't play it for a bit and try and get more out of the lines that are doing something. We seen to much of some players last night when the collapse was ongoing.

And yes, for the love of all things good and wonderful, call a time out.

kingsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 09:56 AM
  #11
saintsnsoldiers
The Nolanator
 
saintsnsoldiers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Logan, Utah
Country: United States
Posts: 2,058
vCash: 500
You call a time out after the second goal. Period! TM states he had TV time outs. Those are different. When San Jose scored their 2nd he should of called a time out. This puts the players on the spot, wakes them up, maybe embarrasses them a bit. They needed it, to be called out in front of the fans for that second goal. No player likes it when the coach has to call a time out to settle things down. But ya do when the players are running around, out of sink. That would of changed momentum, cleared the heads of the players etc. ANDif that does not work you pull the goalie after the 3rd or 4th goal. This is another wake up call for the the team. Hmmm kinda sounds like what the Sharks coach did and look at the outcome. TM got his ass out coached.

saintsnsoldiers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 09:58 AM
  #12
AKAY47
In Lombardi we trust
 
AKAY47's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,831
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by saintsnsoldiers View Post
You call a time out after the second goal. Period! TM states he had TV time outs. Those are different. When San Jose scored their 2nd he should of called a time out. This puts the players on the spot, wakes them up, maybe embarrasses them a bit. They needed it, to be called out in front of the fans for that second goal. No player likes it when the coach has to call a time out to settle things down. But ya do when the players are running around, out of sink. That would of changed momentum, cleared the heads of the players etc. ANDif that does not work you pull the goalie after the red or 4th goal. This is another wake up call for the the team. Hmmm kinda sounds like what the Sharks coach did and look at the outcome. TM got his ass out coached.
I agree with this, 110%

AKAY47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 09:59 AM
  #13
kingsholygrail
You Face Jaraxxus!
 
kingsholygrail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Derpifornia
Country: United States
Posts: 51,595
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Butch 19 View Post
No, they lost because after they had a 4-0 lead, they thought they could coast to an easy win.

Everyone started missing assignments & playing responsibly.

When it was tied 5-5, they played on eggshells - and really who wouldn't? you just blew a 4-0 lead!
When a TEAM as a whole performs like this, it's a coaching problem.

kingsholygrail is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 10:20 AM
  #14
sigepcsun
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: San Diego
Country: United States
Posts: 159
vCash: 500
I coach sports other than hockey but philosophically I believe you take timeouts during situations that occur in any team sport. These are just 4 examples that I believe in.
1- the opponent gains rapid, play after play, momentum and timeout halts their ability to continue the pressure, at least for a moment.
2- your own team is out of sorts, disorganized, missing assignments, or confused by what your opponent is doing
3-you are down a score or two and need to give your top players a short breather for the final push to pull even.
4- you have a young inexperienced team that is starting to lose control of its emotions and lose sight of the game plan.
Philosophically at least 2 of those are occurring the whole 2nd period. A TV timeout is fundamentally viewed by players as a break... Not a structural timeout, plain and simple.
I don't buy Turd Murray's excuse that there wasn't a clear time to call a timeout. IMHO even when we had the lead in the 2nd period we were NOT executing our gameplan even when we scored the 5th goal, we weren't executing our gameplan. I can see it, the fans can see it, and more importantly the Sharks can see it... And they start to believe that they are in the game, and the game at that point is lost.

sigepcsun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 10:26 AM
  #15
TonySCV
Moderator
3 in 5 > 3 in 6
 
TonySCV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 13,785
vCash: 500
At the time the fans were screaming loudest for a timeout to be called, Smyth scored goal 5. It would have been a terrible time to use it then in retrospect. That goal may have never come.

The Kings had three 2 minute long TV timeouts and it didn't change a thing. I seriously doubt that an additional 30 second timeout wouldn't have changed anything either given the complexion of the game and what was happening on the ice. Their only real chance to salvage what was happening was to get to an intermission.

After the intermission, the Kings got back to what works for them. They just didn't score first.

TonySCV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 10:36 AM
  #16
Sydor25
LA Kings
 
Sydor25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: North Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 21,859
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Sydor25
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonySCV View Post
At the time the fans were screaming loudest for a timeout to be called, Smyth scored goal 5. It would have been a terrible time to use it then in retrospect. That goal may have never come.

The Kings had three 2 minute long TV timeouts and it didn't change a thing. I seriously doubt that an additional 30 second timeout wouldn't have changed anything either given the complexion of the game and what was happening on the ice. Their only real chance to salvage what was happening was to get to an intermission.

After the intermission, the Kings got back to what works for them. They just didn't score first.
With that logic, the game would have been won by the Kings 4-3. No problem with a 4-3 win. The Kings didn't need the 5th goal, they just needed to stop the Sharks from scoring.

No one is saying that a timeout would have resulted in a win for the Kings, but at least the coach would be trying something that he has at his disposal. The Sharks used their timeout and changed goalies to spark their team.

Which coach's team won the game? The one that did nothing or the one that tried something?

Sydor25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 10:49 AM
  #17
TonySCV
Moderator
3 in 5 > 3 in 6
 
TonySCV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 13,785
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sydor25 View Post
No one is saying that a timeout would have resulted in a win for the Kings, but at least the coach would be trying something that he has at his disposal. The Sharks used their timeout and changed goalies to spark their team.
If Murray had more than 1 timeout for the entire game at his disposal, then I could see using it to send a message to the team.

I wouldn't have minded Murray using it in the 2nd, but I also didn't mind it when he didn't. He's only got one. It's the playoffs and there are NO TV timeouts in OT. In retrospect, he didn't need it late in the 3rd or in OT, but he doesn't know that at the time.

The best use of the timeout is late in games after an icing where guys are gassed, can't change and there's no TV timeout. If I were a coach, I'd kick myself if I used it early in the game to send a message and then didn't have it later when it was desperately needed. If they had more than one per game, it'd be a different story.

TonySCV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 11:07 AM
  #18
JDM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 9,968
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonySCV View Post
The Kings had three 2 minute long TV timeouts and it didn't change a thing. I seriously doubt that an additional 30 second timeout wouldn't have changed anything either given the complexion of the game and what was happening on the ice. Their only real chance to salvage what was happening was to get to an intermission.
The timeout is about sending a message, one that can only be conveyed by purposefully stopping the game and saying 'get the **** over here'. It almost doesn't even matter what the coach says during those 30 seconds, its the fact that the players see the coach feel the need to use those 30 seconds in the first place that has the effect.

I hate this "we had tv timeouts to talk" crap. TV timeouts are planned and a given. A timeout is an audible and purposeful. They are two totally different things. The message that needed to be sent was not a message of words, it was a message of action, and Murray only has two options to ACT ON during a game - line changes or a timeout.

JDM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 11:08 AM
  #19
PSP
Couldn't Be Happier!
 
PSP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Lake Forest, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,293
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonySCV View Post
If Murray had more than 1 timeout for the entire game at his disposal, then I could see using it to send a message to the team.

I wouldn't have minded Murray using it in the 2nd, but I also didn't mind it when he didn't. He's only got one. It's the playoffs and there are NO TV timeouts in OT. In retrospect, he didn't need it late in the 3rd or in OT, but he doesn't know that at the time.

The best use of the timeout is late in games after an icing where guys are gassed, can't change and there's no TV timeout. If I were a coach, I'd kick myself if I used it early in the game to send a message and then didn't have it later when it was desperately needed. If they had more than one per game, it'd be a different story.
You do understand that you're supporting the coaching decisions that led to the 2nd biggest collapse in Stanley Cup history, don't you?

Not using your time out there is analogous to running around with your hair on fire but not using your bucket of water to douse it because you might get thirsty later.

PSP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 11:09 AM
  #20
TonySCV
Moderator
3 in 5 > 3 in 6
 
TonySCV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 13,785
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDM View Post
TV timeouts are planned and a given. A timeout is an audible and purposeful. They are two totally different things.
I'm pretty sure they're exactly the same thing.

TonySCV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 11:10 AM
  #21
took420s
Registered User
 
took420s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Monterey
Country: Netherlands
Posts: 2,223
vCash: 500
true story bro:

near the 1st intermission its 3-0, wife is pretty drunk and is falling asleep...

she says, "im sad"
i ask, "why are you sad?"
she says, "cuz the kings are going to lose"
i say, "well we have watched this team long enough to know that is very probable"

so at intermission its 3-0 and i turn to pc to get some work done. 2nd period starts and its 4-0, wife snugly on couch passed out. i stop watching the game and just keep on with work, but i can hear it still on tv.

4-1, 4-2, 4-3...each goal perks my ears up and look over at her and smile. she knew it and i knew it, we have watched this team for too many years to know things looked too easy.

my point? a time out was not going to save that game, no different than a timeout saved the kings from the blues when they score 4 or 5 on that major penalty few years ago. this is the kings, this is what they have done all season. get a goal, give one up a few mins later.

this time they got 5, gave back 5 a few mins later...more extreme but same thing in my book. poor leadership from coach to captain is what i would point too...but NOT blaming it on a timeout, that is a joke

took420s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 11:12 AM
  #22
JDM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 9,968
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonySCV View Post
I'm pretty sure they're exactly the same thing.
No. What is said during a timeout or TV timeout can be exactly the same thing. I can't help you if you don't see the difference between "OK guys, FSN says lets take a breath" and the coach saying "STOP THE ****ING GAME RIGHT NOW!"

Its a mental message, not a verbal one. A TV timeout sends no mental message. A coach TO does (or, can).

JDM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 11:13 AM
  #23
Sydor25
LA Kings
 
Sydor25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: North Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 21,859
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Sydor25
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonySCV View Post
If Murray had more than 1 timeout for the entire game at his disposal, then I could see using it to send a message to the team.

I wouldn't have minded Murray using it in the 2nd, but I also didn't mind it when he didn't. He's only got one. It's the playoffs and there are NO TV timeouts in OT. In retrospect, he didn't need it late in the 3rd or in OT, but he doesn't know that at the time.

The best use of the timeout is late in games after an icing where guys are gassed, can't change and there's no TV timeout. If I were a coach, I'd kick myself if I used it early in the game to send a message and then didn't have it later when it was desperately needed. If they had more than one per game, it'd be a different story.
Who cares if you only have 1 timeout. If your team is obviously losing control during a period, whether it is the 1st or 2nd, you call a timeout. It is a message to the team to wake the **** up. I would have called it after the 2nd goal. Who knows, maybe the team would have settled down and the Kings held on for the win. Doing nothing is a message in itself, the coach is telling the team to figure the **** out because he's not going to do anything. If this was Detroit and you have a 40 year old captain and a cup winning group, you can do nothing. But with a young team in their second playoff series, you need to do everything you can to help them focus during a game. TV timeouts are not the time to wake the team up.

Did the SJ coach worry about using his timeout in the 1st period? I don't know if NHL timeouts are tracked anywhere, but I would not be suprised to see Terry use it the least.

He does the same thing with pulling goalies. He always waits until it is way too late to make a difference. It isn't always about the goalie having a bad night, it is a message to the team that they are ****ing up on the ice and need to get back into the game.

Having said that, I have no problem with Quick being left in the net last night. None of the goals were bad and I don't think a goalie should be pulled when leading in the game.

Sydor25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 11:14 AM
  #24
sigepcsun
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: San Diego
Country: United States
Posts: 159
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonySCV View Post
The best use of the timeout is late in games after an icing where guys are gassed, can't change and there's no TV timeout. If I were a coach, I'd kick myself if I used it early in the game to send a message and then didn't have it later when it was desperately needed. If they had more than one per game, it'd be a different story.
My point is that with a lead like that you do everything in your power to keep it. With a 4-0, or 4-1, or 4-2 lead there should not be a worry about anything but that moment. The timeout is not just about sending a message to your team, but also about slowing the momentum of the other team. To me the Kings "desperately" needed it during the second period... we left the arena with a tool that may or may not have helped still in our bag, and we lost. You call the timeout right then and there, during the 2nd period, you coach for the moment and hope that you turn the tide and don't reach a "desperate" moment because you coached your way out of trouble. A real coach 9 times out of 10 can feel when he loses control of a team, a real coach wants to keep control of the team and not coach SCARED.

sigepcsun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2011, 11:19 AM
  #25
TonySCV
Moderator
3 in 5 > 3 in 6
 
TonySCV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 13,785
vCash: 500
I understand where y'all are coming from. It's just not anything I'm up in arms about. The team was destined to lose that game with their disastrous mental breakdowns that led to them abandoning their system. Timeout utilization was a footnote.

TonySCV is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:48 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.