HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

Digital Offsides

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-12-2003, 11:21 PM
  #26
BCCHL inactive
 
Join Date: May 2002
Country:
Posts: 10,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by getnziggywidit
Heck yeah, make as much as they can electronic.

I'm sick to death of inept officials making bad calls costing teams games.
Where is the "rolleyes" smilie when we need it?

BCCHL inactive is offline  
Old
12-12-2003, 11:49 PM
  #27
evman150*
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Victoria, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
Where is the "rolleyes" smilie when we need it?
*AHEM*


evman150* is offline  
Old
12-13-2003, 12:35 AM
  #28
Rob Paxon
⚔Z E M G U S⚔
 
Rob Paxon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: corfu, ny
Country: United States
Posts: 18,369
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Rob Paxon
Quote:
Originally Posted by evman150
Anything electronic or "next generation" is gimmicky.
Yes, your computer is just one giant gimmick. We are all huge suckers.


As far as the argument, if it can be done to the point of near perfection, I'd be for it. Only for offsides as it is very cut and dry. Goals are not. There are many factors. Stick height on deflections, men in the crease, etc, etc.

We get two guys off the ice and suddenly the idea of two referees isn't so bad. Instead of three officials as before the two ref systems, with two handling the task of offsides and other very minor things, and one doing the important, subjective things, you have two people doing important, subjective things.

From the standpoint of efficiency--two men and a device accomplishing more than three men--it is obviously good. If the technology can be much more aqccurate than linesmen while also not altering the game (frozen puck and such issues), then I see it as nothing but stubborn to disagree. To hell with the cassette, the 8-track is where it is at.

Someone brought up the issue of the fact linesmen rely on their jobs for finances. Uh... sorry man but that's capitalism. Industrialization worked because it replaced human labor with machine labor for simple tasks. The lost jobs were made up for with new jobs. Someone has to make the machines. Someone has to install them. Someone has to maintain them. Someone has to create this electronic system. Someone has to install it. Someone has to maintain it. This is why the technological revolution... the internet revolution... also works. Poor Mr Typewriter repairman. That job was replaced with computer repairman. Countless other jobs and tasks have become obsolete. It is called progress.

After saying all this I should note I don't feel strongly on the issue itself. I'd be for it if the conditions noted could be met, but I wouldn't place much importance in any of it.


Last edited by Rob Paxon: 12-13-2003 at 12:40 AM.
Rob Paxon is offline  
Old
12-13-2003, 12:42 AM
  #29
BCCHL inactive
 
Join Date: May 2002
Country:
Posts: 10,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rob_paxon
Someone brought up the issue of the fact linesmen rely on their jobs for finances. Uh... sorry man but that's capitalism.
Uh...sorry man, but that's making a living. I plan to work my ass off to become one of these guys who officiate hockey games for a living. By sacrificing linesmen, you kill dreams for not only myself, but thousands of officials out there....and yes, there are thousands of us with potential and the ambition to become professionals.

Officiating has never been perfect, is not perfect, and will never be perfect.....it wasn't meant to be. Why sacrifice the foundations of an important part of the game for technology that both officials and players would be against?

And comparing hockey to the industrial revolution, etc is useless. Hockey is a sport. Yes, the game has and will continue to evolve....but there are certain parts of the game that need to remain original in order for the game to keep its integrity.

Besides this issue....you have to have linesmen on the ice anyway. If there are no linesmen, who will break up fights and scrums?

BCCHL inactive is offline  
Old
12-13-2003, 12:56 AM
  #30
evman150*
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Victoria, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rob_paxon
Yes, your computer is just one giant gimmick. We are all huge suckers.
This statement leaves me with just one small question....

Would it have been humanly possible to miss the point more?


evman150* is offline  
Old
12-13-2003, 12:57 AM
  #31
c-carp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Illinois
Posts: 9,470
vCash: 500
I personally would say No because even though we all complain avout the refs, I dont want to take the human element out of the game.

c-carp is offline  
Old
12-13-2003, 12:59 AM
  #32
NJ_Devil_Boy
Registered User
 
NJ_Devil_Boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Toronto, CANADA
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,840
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trottier
Its a %^&* game, not the code to launch nuclear missiles!

Why stop at offsides? Let's just clone the ideal hockey players and have the "perfect game". :p

Why not just use Bots? Who needs "humans"...

NJ_Devil_Boy is offline  
Old
12-13-2003, 01:03 AM
  #33
Rob Paxon
⚔Z E M G U S⚔
 
Rob Paxon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: corfu, ny
Country: United States
Posts: 18,369
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Rob Paxon
Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
Uh...sorry man, but that's making a living. I plan to work my ass off to become one of these guys who officiate hockey games for a living. By sacrificing linesmen, you kill dreams for not only myself, but thousands of officials out there....and yes, there are thousands of us with potential and the ambition to become professionals.

1. Maybe we should add 50 new teams, so more of the youngsters whose dream it is to play in the NHL can be happy. Sorry, but there would still be openings for linesmen in lesser leagues. All the people who dream of being a linesmen can instead dream of being a referee. Might not happen, but dreams don't always come true and currently not everyone who can be[edit: meant "wants to be"] an NHL linesman can be one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
Officiating has never been perfect, is not perfect, and will never be perfect.....it wasn't meant to be. Why sacrifice the foundations of an important part of the game for technology that both officials and players would be against?
2. The foundations of hockey are imperfect linesmen calls? I though the idea of linesmen would have been an afterthought. The game was made. They realized they needed a man to enforce the rules. Then they realized they needed more men to enforce the rules. I'm sure the first game of hockey didn't feature 2 linesmen and 2 referees. Perhaps a referee. Perhaps a blueline. Nothing about hockey itself is really changing. The rules aren't changing. This is like saying televising games is bad because it forces advertisement breaks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
And comparing hockey to the industrial revolution, etc is useless. Hockey is a sport. Yes, the game has and will continue to evolve....but there are certain parts of the game that need to remain original in order for the game to keep its integrity.
3. I wasn't comparing hockey to the industrial revolution. I was discussing the very idea of JOBS being replaced by machines in the industrial revolution with, later, JOBS being replaced by electronics in the technological revolution. The fact that these jobs relate to hockey is not what relevant and does not mean I was comparing hockey to the industrial revolution. You brought up the "jobs will be losed" argument and I argued that it doesn't matter, because it opens up other jobs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
Besides this issue....you have to have linesmen on the ice anyway. If there are no linesmen, who will break up fights and scrums?
4. Well... not too long ago there were 2 linesmen and 1 referee. That is three people to break up scrums. Now there are four. With this idea there would be 2. I think it could be managed, even if one referee is at the other end. If something major was going down he could be there quickly to assist. Most scrums I see during games are only ever physically attended two by one official, sometimes two. It is not as if the officials are going to physically restrain all 12 players.

EDIT: personally embarassed by some of these grammar mistakes. not going to get into the excuses


Last edited by Rob Paxon: 12-13-2003 at 01:13 AM.
Rob Paxon is offline  
Old
12-13-2003, 01:09 AM
  #34
Rob Paxon
⚔Z E M G U S⚔
 
Rob Paxon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: corfu, ny
Country: United States
Posts: 18,369
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Rob Paxon
Quote:
Originally Posted by evman150
This statement leaves me with just one small question....

Would it have been humanly possible to miss the point more?

I didn't miss the point, but I did call you on your very loose semantics. I guess helmets were gimmicks at some point. As were all types of equipment right up to composite sticks. I guess televising it was a gimmick. Same with the idea of having a personal trainer. However, these things work because they weren't MERELY gimmicks. A gimmick is not necessarily a bad thing, anyhow. In fact, webster defines it as an INGENIOUS new scheme.

Rob Paxon is offline  
Old
12-13-2003, 02:17 AM
  #35
BCCHL inactive
 
Join Date: May 2002
Country:
Posts: 10,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rob_paxon
Sorry, but there would still be openings for linesmen in lesser leagues.
And those "lesser leagues" pay a fraction of what the NHL pays. All officials in these leagues (both referees and linesmen) have to have summer jobs in order to survive on their own, nevermind support a family if they have one.


Quote:
Originally Posted by rob_paxon
2. The foundations of hockey are imperfect linesmen calls?
Don't put words into my mouth.

The foundation of hockey officiating is that it is done by humans. There is a human element to the game that should never be taken away.


Quote:
Originally Posted by rob_paxon
You brought up the "jobs will be losed" argument and I argued that it doesn't matter, because it opens up other jobs.
...Other jobs for people who are currently attending college/university for electronic/technological purposes and have no hockey ambitions.

If I am a linesman and the league I work for asks me to give up my jersey and skates for a video booth, I leave the game of hockey because it has lost all of its integrity.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rob_paxon
4. Well... not too long ago there were 2 linesmen and 1 referee. That is three people to break up scrums. Now there are four.
No. With the 1 referee and 2 linesmen, there were 2 guys to break up fights and scrums....with 2 referees and 2 linesmen, there are still 2 guys to break up fights and scrums.....those 2 guys are the linesmen. You will only see a referee in the 4-man system (and in very rare cases such as a bench clearing brawl, the 3-man system) get physically involved if he absolutely has to. Otherwise, physical involvement is not in a referee's job description because they have to watch all the unfolding events in order to call the appropriate penalties.

BCCHL inactive is offline  
Old
12-13-2003, 03:22 AM
  #36
Lexicon Devil
Registered User
 
Lexicon Devil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 8,343
vCash: 500
Obviously it should be done if economically and technologically feasible. Unfortunately, it isn't.

The arguments put forth against this idea so forth have been ridiculous. Calling technological progress "Americanization" is just plain stupid. Even if it were "Americanization", there's nothing wrong with becoming more American if it makes the game better. I suppose you were also opposed to video replay on the same grounds? Or how about that green light they used to use to prevent goals from being counted after the siren went? How are these examples any different.

The "tradition" argument is equally inept. The game changes all the time. To oppose change, you have to actually provide reasons why the change is bad, not simply wave the tradition flag. Take the OTL point - there are several good reasons to oppose its use; tradition is not one of them.

The argument concerning the well-being of officials is irrelevant. For one thing, no one cares about officials and their opportunities for advancement. Jobs are eliminated by technology all the time; it's a fact of life. Secondly, the NHL just expanded to two referees a couple years back and the league has grown by 50% in the last 10 year. Even without linesmen, there would still be as many officials as there have traditionally been. Since, as pointed out, you need officials to break up fights, perhaps a 3-official system could be adopted with one Head Referee and two Junior Refs. The juniors could be resonsible for breaking up fights, dropping pucks and would be allowed to call certain penalties.

Lexicon Devil is offline  
Old
12-13-2003, 04:16 AM
  #37
BCCHL inactive
 
Join Date: May 2002
Country:
Posts: 10,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lexicon Devil
For one thing, no one cares about officials and their opportunities for advancement.
Wrong. What you are trying to say, is that no fans care about the officials. Those who do care about the officials and their opportunities for advancement are the leagues that employ the officials, and most importantly, the officials themselves.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lexicon Devil
The juniors could be resonsible for breaking up fights, dropping pucks and would be allowed to call certain penalties.
This is what we call linesmen. They drop the pucks, break up fights and they can call certain penalties.

BCCHL inactive is offline  
Old
12-13-2003, 07:38 AM
  #38
Habsolution
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: En tounoi avec Theo? Bonn chan!
Posts: 2,408
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lexicon Devil
Obviously it should be done if economically and technologically feasible. Unfortunately, it isn't.
Care to explain why it is not possible ? We can send people on the moon but we couldn't get chips to work in frozen pucks ? I don't know if it's feasible from an economical or technological standpoint but if it isn't it'll be at some point in the future.

Anyway that's not what this thread is about.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lexicon Devil
The arguments put forth against this idea so forth have been ridiculous. Calling technological progress "Americanization" is just plain stupid. Even if it were "Americanization", there's nothing wrong with becoming more American if it makes the game better. I suppose you were also opposed to video replay on the same grounds? Or how about that green light they used to use to prevent goals from being counted after the siren went? How are these examples any different.

The "tradition" argument is equally inept. The game changes all the time. To oppose change, you have to actually provide reasons why the change is bad, not simply wave the tradition flag. Take the OTL point - there are several good reasons to oppose its use; tradition is not one of them.
I couldn't agree more. I'm canadian and if technology can better the accuracy of the calls I'm all for it.

It wouldn't change the game more than other technologies that have been brought into the game such as goal reviewing, helmets (both for goalies and skaters), synergy sticks, lighter goalie equipment and so on. In fact it affects the game A LOT LESS. Less human ? Goal reviewing make the game less human and I'm sure there were people like evman and van to complain about it when it was introduced. But honestly who would take goal reviewing out of the game ?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Lexicon Devil
The argument concerning the well-being of officials is irrelevant. For one thing, no one cares about officials and their opportunities for advancement. Jobs are eliminated by technology all the time; it's a fact of life. Secondly, the NHL just expanded to two referees a couple years back and the league has grown by 50% in the last 10 year. Even without linesmen, there would still be as many officials as there have traditionally been. Since, as pointed out, you need officials to break up fights, perhaps a 3-official system could be adopted with one Head Referee and two Junior Refs. The juniors could be resonsible for breaking up fights, dropping pucks and would be allowed to call certain penalties.
Saying no one cares is false but what is true is that they very few people feel concerned about that. Particularly the people who do crappy jobs and earn much less money than those linesmen get for skating on the ice while watching a hockey game. So Van you can cry us a river about those 50-60 linesmen and their families but the fact is 99.99 % of the overall population on the earth doesn't give a ...

Habsolution is offline  
Old
12-13-2003, 08:57 AM
  #39
jackets63
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 1,334
vCash: 500
Would it really be worth all the time and money it would take to make this a reality? I mean, Im a Blue Jackets fan so Im used to getting screwed by the refs by now. But one thing I can honestly say is that we dont seem to have a league-wide epidemic of blown offsides calls. Find me a program that can call interference and obstuction and Im right behind you. But missed offsides calls are so infrequent, I cant believe its even brought about this much discussion.

jackets63 is offline  
Old
12-13-2003, 09:57 AM
  #40
Rob Paxon
⚔Z E M G U S⚔
 
Rob Paxon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: corfu, ny
Country: United States
Posts: 18,369
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Rob Paxon
Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
And those "lesser leagues" pay a fraction of what the NHL pays. All officials in these leagues (both referees and linesmen) have to have summer jobs in order to survive on their own, nevermind support a family if they have one.
That is your call. The opportunity is there and you don't have to take it. The fact they pay less doesn't bring sympathy from me. This is life... jobs are lost and new ones are created.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
The foundation of hockey officiating is that it is done by humans. There is a human element to the game that should never be taken away.
The foundations are that it is played by humans and, to a less important extent, refereed by humans. Linesmen weren't always a part of the game. We use cameras to aid humans in deciding whether or not a goal was a goal. That wasn't always tradition; it certainly wasn't foundation. But it made the NHL better.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
...Other jobs for people who are currently attending college/university for electronic/technological purposes and have no hockey ambitions.
Yes. OTHER jobs. If a persons only skill is being a linesman then they don't have many opportunities to begin with. Not everyone gets their dream job. Countless small jobs relating to hockey, sports, and all things in this world have gone away and been replaced by more efficient jobs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
If I am a linesman and the league I work for asks me to give up my jersey and skates for a video booth, I leave the game of hockey because it has lost all of its integrity.
Again... this is your call.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
No. With the 1 referee and 2 linesmen, there were 2 guys to break up fights and scrums....with 2 referees and 2 linesmen, there are still 2 guys to break up fights and scrums.....those 2 guys are the linesmen. You will only see a referee in the 4-man system (and in very rare cases such as a bench clearing brawl, the 3-man system) get physically involved if he absolutely has to. Otherwise, physical involvement is not in a referee's job description because they have to watch all the unfolding events in order to call the appropriate penalties.
Well it looks like the referees will have to finally break up scrums. Is this too much to ask? If he doesn't break up scrums, then I guess the players will have to settle things and the referee, then the league, would have to clean up the mess. The game isn't going to go to hell just because a referee has to stop two guys pushing each other instead of a linesman.

I'm done with this thread. You can keep raising a fuss about the linesmen who will never get to play in the NHL. Life's tough. Progress wins every time. Being stubborn leaves you in the dust. I've shown pretty well that this is no more against tradition then other changes around the game, from video reviews to two referees to tv broadcasting to linesmen themselves. So your two arguments of it taking jobs and it being against tradition are really out the window, not matter how much you want to stick by them. You do have a point about the linesmen breaking up scrums, but I really don't think it is going to hurt the game to have the refs do it, maybe having the refs let the players go a little more often if they need to.

Rob Paxon is offline  
Old
12-13-2003, 10:06 AM
  #41
Spankatola Jamnuts*
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: ...sucka?
Country: United States
Posts: 10,982
vCash: 500
Quote:
There's a human element that should never be taken away
...because mistakes are endearing?

Spankatola Jamnuts* is offline  
Old
12-13-2003, 11:04 AM
  #42
Buffaloed
Administrator
Webmaster
 
Buffaloed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Buffalo, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 24,945
vCash: 1000
I'd rather boo a real live linesman for blowing the call than a computer chip, or worse yet some shill lawyer from the league office expressing his deep regret 2 days later over the malfunction of the chip. I'd prefer to watch the game, than wait 10-15 minutes while the standby human linesmen get dressed because the computer failed. I'd much prefer the argument and controversy that follows a human making a bad call, which incidentally creates rivalries, than dismissing it as a computer glitch. I've yet to see a high-tech element introduced into a low-tech game that doesn't create more problems than it solves. The NFL is likely to eliminate video replay for that very reason, and I hope the NHL follows suit.

Buffaloed is offline  
Old
12-13-2003, 11:38 AM
  #43
Spankatola Jamnuts*
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: ...sucka?
Country: United States
Posts: 10,982
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buffaloed
I'd rather boo a real live linesman for blowing the call than a computer chip, or worse yet some shill lawyer from the league office expressing his deep regret 2 days later over the malfunction of the chip.

Since when do they admit mistakes? They'd sooner invent a convoluted reinterpretation of an old rule than say they got it wrong.

Spankatola Jamnuts* is offline  
Old
12-13-2003, 11:53 AM
  #44
MotownMadman
Registered User
 
MotownMadman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 5,803
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buffaloed
I'd rather boo a real live linesman for blowing the call than a computer chip, or worse yet some shill lawyer from the league office expressing his deep regret 2 days later over the malfunction of the chip.
I agree. Like C-Carp said earlier, I wouldn't want to take out the human element to officiating. By doing that, you also don't consider all the information that human officials do. For instance, where would the chip be placed in the skate? That makes a huge difference in whether someone can take liberties with the technology by skating in a certain direction.
But my biggest beef is that this won't lead to the biggest change we need and that's calling all the interference and holding BS that goes on. And we don't need technology for that. Though if it's possible to give each player a shock collar that goes off when they drape themselves over an opponent...

MotownMadman is offline  
Old
12-13-2003, 11:56 AM
  #45
Kukla
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: motown
Posts: 456
vCash: 500
This can't happen because the teams will lose big time $$$. Puck is worht $10,000 and goes into the crowd. Team could lose about $100k a game, not worth it.

Kukla is offline  
Old
12-13-2003, 12:01 PM
  #46
Trottier
Very Random
 
Trottier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 28,006
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Flyers Fan
I don't see how it would work, but there is a particular day in the Spring of 1980 that it would have made a HUGE difference.

Wouldn't you agree, Trottier ???
....Trottier suffering from sudden memory loss.... :p

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chock Full Of Booger
I think we should use the digital offsides system, implant electrodes into hockey pants, and zap the hell out of any player that enters the zone before the puck.
Which, of course, will lead to the great pickup line to be used by women: "Is that an electrode in your hockey pants or are you just happy to see me?"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Van
. If there are no linesmen, who will break up fights and scrums?
Why the robotic officials, of course. As needed, they will be "beamed up".


Last edited by Trottier: 12-13-2003 at 12:08 PM.
Trottier is offline  
Old
12-13-2003, 12:02 PM
  #47
syc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not Europe
Posts: 2,035
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WCJr
I think its a great idea, with the proper implementation, set up the nets too, with a chip in the puck to know if the pucks really in when you cant see it beneath those bohemith goalies.
The NHL should do this.

syc is offline  
Old
12-13-2003, 12:03 PM
  #48
darth5
Rowsdower!
 
darth5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Smashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 2,422
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkwjr
This can't happen because the teams will lose big time $$$. Puck is worht $10,000 and goes into the crowd. Team could lose about $100k a game, not worth it.
1) Puck is not going to be worth that much more. RF sensors (passive and active) are costing less than a US nickel in volume (which puck producers would certainly qualify as).
2) Since the netting has gone up fewer pucks end up in the corwd, anyway.

darth5 is offline  
Old
12-13-2003, 12:04 PM
  #49
syc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not Europe
Posts: 2,035
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkwjr
This can't happen because the teams will lose big time $$$. Puck is worht $10,000 and goes into the crowd. Team could lose about $100k a game, not worth it.
It wouldn't cost $10,000 a puck to do this. They could do it for a couple hundred dollars per puck.

It's not like we need nasa to design it, geez a small electronics manufacturing company could design and build these very cheap.

syc is offline  
Old
12-13-2003, 12:19 PM
  #50
Buffaloed
Administrator
Webmaster
 
Buffaloed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Buffalo, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 24,945
vCash: 1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chock Full Of Booger
Since when do they admit mistakes? They'd sooner invent a convoluted reinterpretation of an old rule than say they got it wrong.
They did admit that John Leclair's playoff goal against Buffalo where the puck went in through a hole in the side of the net shouldn't have counted. Of course video replay should have caught that, but high-tech is no more infallible than the humans behind it.

Buffaloed is offline  
Closed Thread

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 12:16 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.