Matt's post game show comments.
- Thread starter *Bleedingblue*
- Start date
If you call a T for hanging on the rim in the first 10 seconds, you should call it in the last 10 seconds.
I've gotta say man, you seem to love to play the contrarian on here. No offense.
Article 2 refers to coaches and bench personnel. I quoted the section that pertains to players on the court.
The difference between the 2 is the South Carolina player slapped the deadball out of an opposing players hands out of frustration. Humphries was not directed towards anyone.
If true, perhaps Jones should refrain from commenting on such calls.
He's not the final authority for our fan base, although I think he's delusional enough to believe he is at times.
He's the same guy who projected UK to land Langford, Bridges, and Simmons and was openly distraught when Langford picked State. He's also the same guy who wasn't objective enough to understand how good of a coach Cal was when he was at Memphis. He runs a nice blog and has connections, but he's not a superpower when it comes to actual basketball knowledge.
People need to understand that.
He's not the final authority for our fan base, although I think he's delusional enough to believe he is at times.
He's the same guy who projected UK to land Langford, Bridges, and Simmons and was openly distraught when Langford picked State. He's also the same guy who wasn't objective enough to understand how good of a coach Cal was when he was at Memphis. He runs a nice blog and has connections, but he's not a superpower when it comes to actual basketball knowledge.
People need to understand that.
Btw I don't think you can compare this to hanging on the rim.
That's a rule. You can't do that.
This apparently is something that's left up to the refs to decide to call or not call. And as such I don't think you make that call at that point of the game.
In the end these are kids. It's supposed to be fun. He got excited. It's just ridiculous
That's a rule. You can't do that.
This apparently is something that's left up to the refs to decide to call or not call. And as such I don't think you make that call at that point of the game.
In the end these are kids. It's supposed to be fun. He got excited. It's just ridiculous
I'm going to have nightmares tonight thinking about the Briscoe-Lee-Hump/Skal lineup trifectas being employed for extended minutes.
Three years of watching Lee clank free throws makes me wonder how much actual time he puts in the gym when it comes to shooting.
And if you call a foul in the first 10 seconds, then you should call the foul the final seconds. But they rarely do.
I'm going to have nightmares tonight thinking about the Briscoe-Lee-Hump/Skal lineup trifectas being employed for extended minutes.
I'm just hoping we aren't without PoY and Willis for an extended period lol
Because Pat Adams has a history of being an asshat. I haven't followed his entire career, but based on anecdotal experiences in UK games, he seems to be a ref who relishes in making it personal when he feels like he's been crossed by a coach or player.
He was horrible Saturday night, and I have little doubt he'll be horrible in any number of future UK games.
Yep. College basketball is horrible. It's why no one watches until the tournament.
But you forgot about the technical foul free throws. We were already up 1 when Humphries grabbed the rebound. If he hits his fts, we could be up 3. If no call on slamming the ball, we're up 1 going to the line. Skal never should have been shooting.
My opinion here is that the call never should have been made on Isaac. It was a dead ball. He wasn't delaying the game. He was excited about the play he just made. He wasn't angry at a ref. He wasn't directing it toward a ref or opposing player. They should have let it go in that instance. It's a no call or a warning. Instead the ref took the outcome of the game into his own hands.
And yes it DID cost us the game. No, it's not the ONLY thing that cost UK the game. The rebounding was a huge problem, but the Cats were still in position to win the game despite that. I don't blame Humphries, by the way. We wouldn't have even been in the game without his rebounding late. I blame the overzealous ref who felt he just had to make that call. That situation and case should be a no call.
No mention of Poythress being out? No mention of Willis missing the stretch run of the game? No mention of a 40 hour recovery time, traveling across the country, and playing the 2nd best SEC team on the road in a game where Lee and Willis were hurt before the game even began?
Nah, offering those components would be to include objective variables that ultimately led to the loss, and from the looks of it, you're not interested in those.
Without speaking to whether the "T" call was correct or incorrect . . . Matt is right. We got killed on the boards, and A&M's offensive rebounding -- or, conversely, our utter lack of defensive rebounding -- cost us the game. If we rebound just marginally better, the "T" at the end is of no effect.
Hard to fault a group of guys that never know which player is going to be injured the next game. This UK team has made its strides regardless of multiple injuries. It's rather impressive, given the degree and frequency of these injuries.
Agreed. I mean it's really amazing. And u see the attitude of the guys too. It's basically oh player x is out? No matter. The next guy will come in and step up.
Poy get injuries and we play some of our best basketball without him. Lee misses the 2nd half of the UT game....no matter. The mere fact that without Poy and then Willis getting injured the fact that we even had a chance speaks volumes about this team.
No one better question the heart of these guys.
Some one tried to point that out to Matt on the post game show that there was no rule that pertained to that situation
Whoa, thar Tex! We agree, I was just listing a few things that happened after the tip. Many things led to the loss, much more than some whistle blowin' hombre in a zebra shirt.
By the way, whatever you got poured over them rocks, iffin it's over 12 years old, single malt and better in' 100 bucks a bottle, mind pourin me a swig?
If these refs were good, no one would discuss them or know their names.
That's different.. they are doing that to kill the clock and it's a live ball situation.
How many offensive rebounds did TAMU have in the second half of the game? According to the article I just read, they finished with 18. At half, we had the lead and they had 15 according to one source and 14 according to another.
If Isaac doesn't foul out, he is in the game for the final play. Bottomline is that when you look at the facts, we didn't lose because of the rebounds but they were a factor.
But, in all fairness, it was STUPID discretion. If my kid slams the front door because I told him to pick up the junk on the porch, he gets grounded for his actions. If I tell him there is a new bicycle for him on the porch and he slams the door on his way out, why would I ground him? Common sense is lacking in calling this T. Plus, it violates the spirit of the law. To me, that is more important.
The 2nd chance pts we gave up in the 1st half ultimately doomed us. But that was a terrible T. I've seen that same situation with no whistle a million times.
The only reason your saying this is because despite the 15 boards we shot the ball so well in the first half we actually led at half.
But just cause we were still winning doesn't mean it didn't have an effect. Had we given up say 7 boards instead of 15, we are probably up double digits at the half and OT never even happens.
We outshot them. The turnover battle was close. Free throw rate was about even too. The only factor of the four major ones that we are killed in was rebounding %
The poster I replied to said that we lost the game because of rebounding....period. I agree with you that it was a factor. But, we offset that factor with a high shooting percentage. Plus, at the end of the game, the rebounds were 37 to 33, if I am reading that right from ESPN.
We shot 50% and they shot 39%. This was clearly a game that was simply even. The deciding factor in this game came down to a few plays at the end. The ONLY play that had nothing to do with the game itself was the T. That is why the T was such a BIG factor.
I agree and this is just my opinion but I get so tired of people saying we shouldn't have been put in the situation for ref to decide game and that our rebounding cost us this game. Yes, we rebounded poorly, AND we overcame that as we were up 1 with 9 seconds left. I'll reiterate - we overcame poor rebounding to be up 1 point in a tough environment. A ref, and one with an agenda, then makes a call, that, in all likelihood, and nobody can say for sure, cost us the game. How bout instead of saying don't put the ref in that position, that the ref actually NOT put himself in that position.
Then why can't YOU just let everyone vent? And then they CAN move on. If you keep arguing, it can't move on
No, the call shouldn't have been made but it was and we were down 1 after they hit their free throws. Skal hit 1 to tie and missed his second free throw. Had he hit his second free throw we only have a 1 point lead. Saying the T shouldn't have been called has no bearing on this particular discussion. UK78 said "we would have won if Skal made both free throws" and that's not true at all. We would have lost by 1 instead of 2.
Now if uk78 had said "Skal should have held his position at the very end and got the rebound than he would have a point.
I don't think you're wrong about the rule book being vague in some circumstances and open to interpretation, but when some say it IS the rule to call that play a technical, they are also wrong. It is a discretionary call for the ref and if you or they look at the replay, it is blatantly obvious Hump wasn't showing poor sportsmanship or trying to delay the game. He was caught up emotionally after a game where his team had been pushed around all night, giving up offensive rebound after offensive rebound, and he secured a rebound with a foul FINALLY being called. It was probably a mixture of excitement and relief a rebounding foul was called on A&M. He obviously is a good kid who was immediately apologetic for what he did. He wasn't showing up anyone and didn't keep up the act like so many players do.
Honestly, I feel he is going to be a better player from this. He'll learn and come out with something to prove. Like others have said in other threads, I'd love to see Cal start him next game as a vote of confidence. Long term, it would be beneficial to him and us.
Again, I think everyone is in violent agreement on that point. Fact remains is that the referee acted within his discretion, regardless of how poor it was.
Latest posts
-
When is the last time you felt UK got a favorable whistle?- Latest: Phil_The_Music
-
-
-
