OU @ KU

[kentkel]

Get some new material. This stuff is pretty played out...

Curious as to your thoughts on this "gem"?
[video=youtube;QblPO0qijJA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QblPO0qijJA[/video]

 

[ribsnwhiskey]

Get some new material. This stuff is pretty played out...

No, you're played out. Why don't you just go away once and for all, troll boi.

 

[HFCS]

Did Kansas benefit from that 50/50 call? Yes. Did Kansas get hurt by other 50/50 calls in that same game? Yes. That's the end of my "worry" about the refs in that game. Trying to convince me to feel otherwise is like trying to change someone's opinion on abortion; it simply won't happen no matter how good you feel your argument is. I do nopt concern myself with what was called because it is not a fixable item. The team can do nothing to improve on it for their next game, so why waste time dwelling on it? The game being covered as controversial by ESPN means nothing. ESPN turns virtually everything into a huge ordeal. They are soap operas for men. The more content they run showing A) the major teams with the biggest fan bases and/or B) little guys getting "screwed" by those major teams with major fan bases, the better. They have blown up their network carrying on about Jim Boeheim whining about a 50/50 call. I am sure all the Syracuse fans are as irate as ISU fans over the "obviously wrong" call that "shows the horrible favoritism that Duke gets" but are completely ignoring the "obviously wrong" (in the eyes of Maryland fans and fans wanting Syracuse to lose) no call at the end of the Maryland game last night that allowed Syracuse to win the game. It's typical fandom at it's standard level. Last night's OU/KU game was very tightly called, sending a lot of KU guys to the benchin foul trouble for ticky tack fouls. The players seemed to adjust over the course of the game and were able to pull out a big win. It doesn't matter if they were good calls or bad calls, you have to deal with the results that happen and play to the final buzzer. ISU had a chance to win the game in Ames last year when it went to OT and they failed.

You're a troll because you call it a 50/50 call. You're either blind or stupid. The no call of the collision wasn't even the horrendous call on the play.

You either need to drop this asinine opinion or accept that you're a troll posting on this board. Chose one or the other. Keep posting and accept that you're a troll, or admit to reality and try to be a normal poster like other opposing fans.

 

[aeroclone]

Curious as to your thoughts on this "gem"?
[video=youtube;QblPO0qijJA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QblPO0qijJA[/video]

Clearly stuff like this happens all the time in college basketball, so what is the big deal if KU ends up on the right side of this one?

 

[State43]

You caught me. I didn't actually go and add them up. I didn't think the exact number was important, but it was more than one as I scrolled through the thread from the beginning. I'll try to be more accurate next time.

Honest question...how many of you were scripting posts to make directly towards me when when you thought that Oklahoma might win that game?

And for those griping about the refs, you do realize that Wiggins AND Tharpe AND Ellis AND Traylor AND Frankamp all were in foul trouble in the first half, right? It seemed like every time we touched someone a foul was called. OU had a small number of free throws shot per number of foul because so many of the fouls called on KU were silly ticky tack fouls that weren't shooting fouls. But as ISU fans I am sure you are sworn to ignore that and see only fouls that went for Kansas. And you call me a homer...

10 straight. Only Duke has managed a run of even half of that in a major conference since the modern era of college basketball kicked off in '85. Heck, my oldest daughter is 10 and has never seen KU NOT win the conference. Love it.

* Ten Straight
The win in Hilton last year was a fraud and I refuse to give credit for it

 

[twocoach]

You're a troll because you call it a 50/50 call. You're either blind or stupid. The no call of the collision wasn't even the horrendous call on the play.You either need to drop this asinine opinion or accept that you're a troll posting on this board. Chose one or the other. Keep posting and accept that you're a troll, or admit to reality and try to be a normal poster like other opposing fans.

Or do neither and continue as is. There is no either/or, no matter how much you pound your chest. My use of the term "50/50 call" is because block/charge calls are by definition a 50/50 call. They are at the discretion of the referee to decide how he sees it. I agree the vast majority of people that witnessed that call that disagreed with the decision reached by the referee but I disagreed with several other ones during the game as well that went against Kansas. This has all been covered before. You are officially banging your head against a brick wall here. Don't waste your time trying to convince me otherwise.

 

[HFCS]

Or do neither and continue as is. There is no either/or, no matter how much you pound your chest. My use of the term "50/50 call" is because block/charge calls are by definition a 50/50 call. They are at the discretion of the referee to decide how he sees it. I agree the vast majority of people that witnessed that call that disagreed with the decision reached by the referee but I disagreed with several other ones during the game as well that went against Kansas. This has all been covered before. You are officially banging your head against a brick wall here. Don't waste your time trying to convince me otherwise.

You don't even understand why it was a bad call and not a difficult judgement call.

 

[rholtgraves]

Or do neither and continue as is. There is no either/or, no matter how much you pound your chest. My use of the term "50/50 call" is because block/charge calls are by definition a 50/50 call. They are at the discretion of the referee to decide how he sees it. I agree the vast majority of people that witnessed that call that disagreed with the decision reached by the referee but I disagreed with several other ones during the game as well that went against Kansas. This has all been covered before. You are officially banging your head against a brick wall here. Don't waste your time trying to convince me otherwise.

If the charge would have been called (as the Big 12 said it was a charge and that the refs messed up) would ISU have won the game?
The answer is yes.

 

[twocoach]

* Ten StraightThe win in Hilton last year was a fraud and I refuse to give credit for it

I am so broken up about that...

 

[twocoach]

You don't even understand why it was a bad call and not a difficult judgement call. View attachment 25189

I understand perfectly. If I am an ISU fan or an anti-KU fan, it is a "bad call". If not, it is a "difficult judgement call".

 

[twocoach]

If the charge would have been called (as the Big 12 said it was a charge and that the refs messed up) would ISU have won the game? The answer is yes.

You cannot answer that with 100% accuracy. Perhaps ISU missed their free throws and Kansas hits a half court heave three to win at the buzzer. The result was not guaranteed.

 

[HFCS]

I understand perfectly. If I am an ISU fan or an anti-KU fan, it is a "bad call". If not, it is a "difficult judgement call".

You you just proved for the fiftieth time that you have no idea what you're talking about.

If it had just been a no call, an understandable no call, ISU wins the game.

The unforgivable part is calling Niang for a foul because he's laying on the ground with a KU player on top of him. That call is the one that was called because KU choked on the shot. There is no excuse in any way for that call on the floor after calling nothing on the shot collision. You're blinded by your fandom on it and you are most definitely a troll.

 

[Freebird]

Hey. Twocoach deserves credit for being the first poster ever since I joined CF to inspire me enough to figure out how to edit my ignore list. That is a pretty major accomplishment.

 

[cmjh10]

Hey. Twocoach deserves credit for being the first poster ever since I joined CF to inspire me enough to figure out how to edit my ignore list. That is a pretty major accomplishment.

More people need to do this. No point in arguing with him

 

[carvers4math]

Trollcoach making me long for hawkaholic.

 

[kentkel]

You you just proved for the fiftieth time that you have no idea what you're talking about.

If it had just been a no call, an understandable no call, ISU wins the game.

The unforgivable part is calling Niang for a foul because he's laying on the ground with a KU player on top of him. That call is the one that was called because KU choked on the shot. There is no excuse in any way for that call on the floor after calling nothing on the shot collision. You're blinded by your fandom on it and you are most definitely a troll.

This x1000. By not making a call on the "charge", the ref was making a statement that he was going to let the players determine the outcome. Okay, I disagree with the ref's call, but I can live with it had the following NOT happened: He proceeds to call a foul on Niang (who is on the ground) for some head-scratching reason, and the call coincided with a missed shot attempt by the KU player (and rebound by ISU). No way KU digs itself out of that hole with the limited time remaining, unless those TWO screwjobs didn't happen almost simutaneously. And don't even get me started about how they assessed Withey's fifth foul to someone else! All of those things were at the end of the game, too.

 

[twocoach]

You you just proved for the fiftieth time that you have no idea what you're talking about.If it had just been a no call, an understandable no call, ISU wins the game.The unforgivable part is calling Niang for a foul because he's laying on the ground with a KU player on top of him. That call is the one that was called because KU choked on the shot. There is no excuse in any way for that call on the floor after calling nothing on the shot collision. You're blinded by your fandom on it and you are most definitely a troll.

You are so jaded that you cannot even figure what the foul was that was called. Niang and Johnson both grabbed for the ball as it dropped to them as they both laid in a heap on the floor. Johnson got the the ball first and passed out to the perimeter. Niang was a little slower and when grabbing for the ball ended up whacking Johnson's arms as he passed the ball out. It was a clear foul, you can see Niang's hand draped down Johnson's right forearm. Your distaste of it is just fueled by the previous no call and the result. Niang wasn't called for "just laying on the ground with a KU player on top of him".

 

[twocoach]

Trollcoach making me long for hawkaholic.

They have an "add to ignore list" option that you are more than free to use on me. PLEASE DO. That way you do not have to see any offending posts by me and we do not have to read any of your responses to my offending posts. It's a win-win.

 

[HFCS]

You are so jaded that you cannot even figure what the foul was that was called. Niang and Johnson both grabbed for the ball as it dropped to them as they both laid in a heap on the floor. Johnson got the the ball first and passed out to the perimeter. Niang was a little slower and when grabbing for the ball ended up whacking Johnson's arms as he passed the ball out. It was a clear foul, you can see Niang's hand draped down Johnson's right forearm. Your distaste of it is just fueled by the previous no call and the result. Niang wasn't called for "just laying on the ground with a KU player on top of him".

ISU player should have just lay there getting pancake blocked after he was steamrolled with no call. You have shown us the light with your amazing troll knowledge.

 

[twocoach]

If the charge would have been called (as the Big 12 said it was a charge and that the refs messed up) would ISU have won the game? The answer is yes.

The answer is not "yes", it is "possibly". ISU was up by two and would have been sending a freshman to line line to ice the game. Kansas still had a timeout left and there were still 5 seconds left on the clock. That's more than enough time to advance the ball the length of the court and get up a shot to tie or win the game if Niang misses either one of the free throws. I have seen at least a half dozen games easily this year already where a team has made a tough shot in the last few seconds to win. Johnson had already hit two tough threes in the previous 24 seconds; it's not hard to picture him hitting one more.