Talk:Over-the-line

We need some real pictures here. &rArr; Jarlaxle Artemis   04:34, 22 July 2006 (UTC)    HANNAH IS AWESOME!ct per OMBAC official rules. You only get two pitches (not three "strikes" as is discribed) and there are no "doubles" or "triples". You either get a hit, home run, foul out, pie out (hit it in the triangle), or the fielder catches the ball for an out. If a batter has a whif they are out (no "strikes"). Three hits is a run. If the ball passes the back fielder it is a homerun. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.107.28.183 (talk) 22:00, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

"The annual World Championships now gathers more than 1200 teams from all over the world." - Actually it's limited to exactly 1200, so you can't really say "over 1200", I am being pickey. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.237.249.251 (talk) 22:04, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Neutrality
I'm not familiar with the OMBAC tournament, but the section about it seems to focus far too much on unsourced criticism. It would be helpful if someone more knowledgeable on the subject could add sources for the facts and any legit criticism and get rid of anything else.tktktk (talk) 21:58, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

To me and others who have been - my first time in '09. The first weekend is when much of the debauchery is going on. This mostly due to the laid back nature of the sport and many of the teams just there for the fun. The second weekend the play gets better - the crowds are smaller. The signage is crass but funny. Menus sporting "Michael Jackson Kiddie Meal", "Show us your t__ts for a free soda" and a wall of "I love my Jugs" polaroid photos all contribute. That doesn't seem to stop many - I'd estimate 20% of people - from bringing their young children to the event. There is a lot of creativity in the team names like "Everything hurts but my d__k still works" and "We're not 14-yos. but we play one on the Internet". I found them silly and hilarious and so did everyone else I know. Taken in the spirit - as a comment on pop culture and society in general they are quite ingenious. If these elements of the event offend anyone I highly recommend they don't go to the significant trouble of getting to and parking at this very crowded venue while the games are on. I saw no fights - violence or police trouble the whole day I was there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.107.20.162 (talk) 19:56, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Tktktk hit the nail on the head: There is too much unsourced criticisn and POV. As far as the longtime players offending the crowd, it is biased and unfounded. Here is an article about Chuck Millenbah published in the San Diego Union Tribune a few months ago. Every year there are articles about seasoned players. They are highly respected. I would welcome proof of critiques of "younger tournament goers who find the older participants increasingly out of place". They're the ones who make the tournament. Children and grandchildren of original players come out together and celebrate the tournament. There are newspaper articles and television coverage each year that will show how much the crown embraces the longtime players and what they stand for. With all the drinking and the size of the crowds, there has never been, in 56 years, any serious trouble at the tournament. There are a log of new players coming in every year and old ones going out. There are far fewer older teams than there are younger teams. The Open Division, the younger players, is the largest division by far over the other divisions, which change according to the players' ages. This entire paragraph should be removed. --Bloggirl (talk) 08:22, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV
I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
 * This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
 * There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
 * It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
 * In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 03:42, 27 June 2013 (UTC)