Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
A local (well, over the strait in Everett) sports guy set out his conspiracy theory that something is fishy in the Big 10. He believes that the Big 10 powers that be orchestrated a Wiscy dive so that tOSU would get into the playoff, therefore bring bazillions to the conference and schools. And of course Wiscy had to benefit additionally, somehow, someway.
A lot of aspects seem very odd – Wiscy favored, tOSU lost their QB, and Anderson leaves within a few days. Evidently he had no ties to O St. Hmmmm…
Ryebread, I feel your pain. I try to not let the refs get to me. That said, at times the disparity has seemed so great that a few years ago I did a little research on one of my favorite players, that bull in a china shop otherwise known as Tyler Hansbrough.
Long story short, the guy’s average fouls per game were 2.8, 2.4, 2.4 and 2.3 over his 4 year career. He fouled out exactly 3 times. 3. Once in year 1, once in year 2 and once in year 4.
Call it an outlier, but that defies explanation. Actually, it doesn’t.
Interesting how the refs are focusing on the the team that’s ahead, instead of the team that’s behind and has to be aggressive. Oh wait, it’s State in the lead.
I watched the Ducks last night. They have a distinctive style which reminds me of a flyweight boxer who can’t knock someone out cold but is very quick and strong and just beats the crap out of the opponent all day and gets the lopsided TKO. The potential O/Bama (see what I did there?) matchup would be very interesting.
^I dunno, all throughout my life I forgot about all the extraneous crap when I was on the field or court or the mat. That’s what sports are for.
re: Cat’s flat shots – get all of them this for Xmas: http://www.94fifty.com
Thanks pakfan, I looked through my copy but couldn’t find that. Re: the “first player”, I think that’s also a valid point. Just an odd time to make that call.
re: Turner OOB
I believe the call was that Turner left the court voluntarily, hence a violation. If that’s the case though, it should have been called immediately. The fact that he touched the ball has no relevance. That’s a football call.
It’s interesting that the defender also left the court voluntarily. Should that have factored in, as in offsetting violations? No call? AFAIK, a “leaving the court” violation doesn’t stipulate whether the player is O or D.
Other mitigating factors: a player can leave the court due to momentum, and just has to getting “something in, nothing out” before being able to touch the ball. Same with being forced out or pushed out.
In this case, you could argue that Turner’s momentum carried him out, and the fact that he was already well ahead of the D player meant that he did not create any more of an advantage by going OOB. He was also well inbounds before he got the pass. I think it should have been a no call.
