not sure why this wasn't a tech. he threw his shoe....
its at 1:21
its at 1:21
Darren H did a good job filling in for Tom. Lots of energy.
Exaggerate much ? Losing Garrison cost a "natty", "Thug State". What exactly makes them a Thug school ?If he clips Garrison on the foot or somewhere with that wizzed shoe and he comes down on it wrong after the dunk and breaks his ankle and we don't win the natty because of it….
It wouldn't have been so “funny” then as another poster put it.
Thats the 1st time we have ever played Thug St and I bet its the last.
They have no business being on the same court with UK !
Could easily have caused an injury if stepped on.
Either way throwing equipment should result in a T. It could’ve hit a player, an official, etc. just bizarre.Not really what I saw live. Why he threw his shoe I’m not sure, but he threw it low and wide of Garrison., to me just getting it on the sidelines… Garrisons reaction was because he ran into him after the play. Not everything is as it appears……IMO
Because the Good Ole Zebra boys be hatin.
If he wanted it off the court he could have thrown it in any other direction, NOT directly into the direction of play. For example, he could have thrown it toward his bench. He carried it with him down the court and threw it toward players rather than away from them. It was intentional and dangerous.Not really what I saw live. Why he threw his shoe I’m not sure, but he threw it low and wide of Garrison., to me just getting it on the sidelines… Garrisons reaction was because he ran into him after the play. Not everything is as it appears……IMO
So you’re saying he threw it in the direction of Garrison and his aim sucks. The fact he threw the shoe in that half of the court should be a T, doesn’t matter why.Not really what I saw live. Why he threw his shoe I’m not sure, but he threw it low and wide of Garrison., to me just getting it on the sidelines… Garrisons reaction was because he ran into him after the play. Not everything is as it appears……IMO
So you’re saying he threw it in the direction of Garrison and his aim sucks. The fact he threw the shoe in that half of the court should be a T, doesn’t matter why.
Not v Ky, its swept under the rug, ignored and it vanishes.I was under the impression that throwing something resulted in a technical, I've seen NBA guys get technicals for tossing a shoe out of the way
They really did suck ass last night.Exactly why it should've been an ejection imo. He threw that low and our player could've easily landed on it. Very dangerous play.
Of course pathetic officials did nothing.
It doesn't make any sense that he would fling his shoe as hard as he could far in front of him in the direction of our player if he was "just getting it on the sidelines." I'm convinced it was absolutely directed towards Garrison and he just missed.Not really what I saw live. Why he threw his shoe I’m not sure, but he threw it low and wide of Garrison., to me just getting it on the sidelines… Garrisons reaction was because he ran into him after the play. Not everything is as it appears……IMO
Zero chance that is what happaned. The play was essentially over because he couldn't catch him. No reason to not just put it on. He tried to knock the ball out of garrisons handsNot really what I saw live. Why he threw his shoe I’m not sure, but he threw it low and wide of Garrison., to me just getting it on the sidelines… Garrisons reaction was because he ran into him after the play. Not everything is as it appears……IMO
Are you his dad? Fairy land you're living in.Not really what I saw live. Why he threw his shoe I’m not sure, but he threw it low and wide of Garrison., to me just getting it on the sidelines… Garrisons reaction was because he ran into him after the play. Not everything is as it appears……IMO
Yep, and he could have put it back on just as quickly as picking it up and running the length of the floor and then throwing it(obviously not to just get it off the floor)If he wanted it off the court he could have thrown it in any other direction, NOT directly into the direction of play. For example, he could have thrown it toward his bench. He carried it with him down the court and threw it toward players rather than away from them. It was intentional and dangerous.
That’s ridiculous
If you can’t beat ‘em, yeet em.
He was 100% throwing it at the ball to disrupt the play. He coulda left if laying otherwiseNot really what I saw live. Why he threw his shoe I’m not sure, but he threw it low and wide of Garrison., to me just getting it on the sidelines… Garrisons reaction was because he ran into him after the play. Not everything is as it appears……IMO
How about throwing a shoe at our player? Freaking gooberExaggerate much ? Losing Garrison cost a "natty", "Thug State". What exactly makes them a Thug school ?