Jump to content

Texas vs Purdue - Sunday, 7:40pm on TNT


shadow_operative

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, Porterhouse said:

You missed one that everyone saw. It was 100% of Bishop. Not even a shred of doubt. 

I’ve seen you say this five times now. I would just say that it took the refs like five minutes to figure out what was apparently so obvious. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, OU Sucks said:

I shouldn't have gone on Twitter only to be reminded of this non-call.  That alone was a 3-6 point swing.

 

yep.  that has been a foul all tournament.  bunch middle school refs love to wind up for the "Leslie Neilsen" version of the charge call.

that said, I think they should not call that a charge but it has been all tournament.  they need to start calling WAY more blocks.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, dcar00 said:

yep.  that has been a foul all tournament.  bunch middle school refs love to wind up for the "Leslie Neilsen" version of the charge call.

that said, I think they should not call that a charge but it has been all tournament.  they need to start calling WAY more blocks.

That’s not a charge. You know it’s not.

Charging is the worst rule in basketball and I maintain should be removed as written. Creates non basketball plays

Edited by hobbes2702
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, hobbes2702 said:

I mean you admitted as much in your post so I’m not sure why you’re being argumentative about it

It has been a charge all tournament, except for today.  and you know it.

Edited by dcar00
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, hobbes2702 said:

Looks like we took 12-15 shots in the paint today. We took 68 fucking shots.

The few times we tried to drive to the paint, we were discouraged by their size, so we turned around and kicked the ball outside. When we drive, we do it without a plan most of the time. It seems to me that it's usually an individual effort. Someone dribbles in circles, plants his feet down, and desperately hopes for someone else to bail him out. That's usually our interior game. Hope Beard fixes this in the offseason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, hobbes2702 said:

I mean you admitted as much in your post so I’m not sure why you’re being argumentative about it

My gawd dude. Are you just defending the refs so hard to be argumentative at this point? 99/100 times, that’s getting called a charge. That’s the definition of a charge. Literally textbook

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, jinx said:

I’ve seen you say this five times now. I would just say that it took the refs like five minutes to figure out what was apparently so obvious. 

That was the first time I’d posted on the matter. I don’t know why they took a long time - probably because they were looking at Bishop’s feet and the ball. It was off Bishop regardless. It was obvious. If it wasn’t obvious to you, go join Gatsby in The Weak Zone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

I mean you admitted as much in your post so I’m not sure why you’re being argumentative about it

So one of the three dudes in this thread who said all the fouls against Edey were legitimate "hacks", also says the most obvious charge on Purdue wasn't a charge?  LOLOL.  We've gotten called every single time we've done that.  Every other team that I've watched this season that's done that has been called for a charge, too.  Marcus was literally standing there for 2 seconds without moving, and the Purdue guy ran into him, out of control after making the pass.

Edited by OU Sucks
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

That’s not a charge. You know it’s not.

Charging is the worst rule in basketball and I maintain should be removed as written. Creates non basketball plays

You guys are both right. That’s not a charge. It’s been called that a shitload all month (and shouldn’t be). 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stop. I said he was out of bounds on this thread live before they even looked at it. It was obvious. For fucks sake

But I am curious in what actually happened. You and Porterhouse saying it is so ain’t truth.

Now, perhaps if someone said, there’s nothing to definitive to overturn, I wouldn’t disagree. But on replays they cut it short once they started talking about Bishops foot being out.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, A’Dam Psycho said:

My gawd dude. Are you just defending the refs so hard to be argumentative at this point? 99/100 times, that’s getting called a charge. That’s the definition of a charge. Literally textbook

This is what was said,

that said, I think they should not call that a charge but it has been all tournament.

So I was literally agreeing with what he said. And I’m sorry if you think any block/charge call is 99%, with college basketball officials, then you haven’t watched much basketball. It is the least consistent rule in all of sports which is my entire fucking point you dunce.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, OU Sucks said:

So one of the three dudes in this thread who said all the fouls against Edey were legitimate "hacks", also says the most obvious charge on Purdue wasn't a charge?  LOLOL.  We've gotten called every single time we've done that.  Every other team that I've watched this season that's done that has been called for a charge, too.  Marcus was literally standing there for 2 seconds without moving, and the Purdue guy ran into him, out of control after making the pass.

I didn’t say all the fouls against him were legitimate hacks. I even said I thought a few were soft. But we fouled him and played physical with him a lot. That was literally the game plan we had to get him out of the game. It worked. They had to take him off the court because he couldn’t make FTs and it allowed us to slow the game down and get back in the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, dcar00 said:

dad didnt like the offense or the touches for Tre.

this is not true.  Well, it very well may be true that dad didn't like the offense or touches, but that isn't why Tre left the team.  I understand the anger, but I urge folks to withhold judgment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, someguy said:

this is not true.  Well, it very well may be true that dad didn't like the offense or touches, but that isn't why Tre left the team.  I understand the anger, but I urge folks to withhold judgment.

Just to be clear, it’s a private matter as to why he left?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Had Enough said:


But I am curious in what actually happened. You and Porterhouse saying it is so ain’t truth.

Now, perhaps if someone said, there’s nothing to definitive to overturn, I wouldn’t disagree. But on replays they cut it short once they started talking about Bishops foot being out.

Me saying so doesn’t make it the truth. Your eyes, live, should’ve made it obvious. It’s hilarious there is even a hint of disagreement on that call. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

There has been zero consistency with charging ever in the history of basketball so I’m not sure what you expect. That’s my entire point about why it shouldn’t exist as written

I forget which game we were watching last night as we were flipping back and forth, but one had the worst charging call I’ve seen in years. I told my son that I’ve given up even trying to figure out what is a charge any more. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Porterhouse said:

That was the first time I’d posted on the matter. I don’t know why they took a long time - probably because they were looking at Bishop’s feet and the ball. It was off Bishop regardless. It was obvious. If it wasn’t obvious to you, go join Gatsby in The Weak Zone. 

Mistook you for Hobbes I guess. My bad. I think that one was 50/50 but never saw feet synched up with the last to touch it. Seemed Purdue had last physical contact, but whatever.

Like someone said earlier, the one that killed me was the bailout call when we had Ivey pinned in the corner. They saw some tick tack foul and walked Ivey out of his trap in the corner right to the double bonus free throw line.

Both things can be true. Texas was going to have more fouls by the nature of the game and did. And the refs sucked shit through a straw and gave almost every benefit of the doubt call to Purdue. They were ready to blow the whistle as soon as Lurch got the ball every time. I seem to remember big Cam Williams getting reverse treatment, where he got murdered all game with no calls and any time he touched anyone he was called for a foul.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

I didn’t say all the fouls against him were legitimate hacks. I even said I thought a few were soft. But we fouled him and played physical with him a lot. That was literally the game plan we had to get him out of the game. It worked. They had to take him off the court because he couldn’t make FTs and it allowed us to slow the game down and get back in the game.

Okay, so you still haven't stated why you thought this wasn't a charge?  Marcus established position, and not only did he establish position, he did it way before contact was made.  He didn't slide over at all.  Purdue player bowled straight into him, taking him out.  You're arguing that blocks and charges are subjective, which is true, but one or the other had to be called there.  But again, it was blatantly obvious that Marcus was in a legal defending position...he didn't even move.  Again:

 

Edited by OU Sucks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ewreck10 said:

FUCCCKKKKKK. I was happy to get out of the first round, but damn, I let myself believe that we could make a deep run. I should have known better, but it was right fucking there. 
 

Why can’t we have nice things? 

Lack of talent. We have some nice guys that fight hard but Shaka had more talent on all of his teams than Beard with this one. We will be back in this position, many times, with Beard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, A’Dam Psycho said:

My gawd dude. Are you just defending the refs so hard to be argumentative at this point? 99/100 times, that’s getting called a charge. That’s the definition of a charge. Literally textbook

yep. he's planted and williams runs right into him. whistle swallowed.  its a charge.  I think they should change the rule but it is a charge and has been called that way all tournament...except for today at a critical time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, SuckitKevin said:

What I saw out of this team tonight is exactly what I’d like to see from all Texas teams. They were aggressive and played extremely hard. It sucks to lose but I’m proud of the effort they played with.

Yeah, you hear it in the national commentary, talking about how tough, hard-nosed, and defensive-minded this team is.  Tell me the last time you ever heard them say that about our football OR basketball teams.  Best case, they don't call us "soft".

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, OU Sucks said:

Okay, so you still haven't stated why you thought this wasn't a charge?  Marcus established position, and not only did he establish position, he did it way before contact was made.  He didn't slide over at all.  Purdue player bowled straight into him, taking him out.  Again:

 

Because I don’t think charging should really be called that long after the ball is away especially when Ivey is trying to step around him. Like I’ve said, charging is an awful rule that leads to this kind of debate. It is far to subjective and leads to players trying to plant their feet on the ground somewhere instead of playing defense. I also think it’s dangerous to incentivize players to do that. I’m not saying that’s what happened here but that’s my general outlook on why charging sucks.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, taybo20 said:

Just to be clear, it’s a private matter as to why he left?

yes.  

Mitchell's dad went on a twitter rampage shortly after Mitchell left and many folks put two and two together and drew conclusions.  But he left for private personal reasons.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Me saying so doesn’t make it the truth. Your eyes, live, should’ve made it obvious. It’s hilarious there is even a hint of disagreement on that call. 

Oddly enough many above commented that it was out on Purdue until the consideration of Bishop stepping out of bounds came into play. That after several minutes of review.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, hobbes2702 said:

Because I don’t think charging should really be called that long after the ball is away especially when Ivey is trying to step around him. Like I’ve said, charging is an awful rule that leads to this kind of debate. It is far to subjective and leads to players trying to plant their feet on the ground somewhere instead of playing defense. I also think it’s dangerous to incentivize players to do that. I’m not saying that’s what happened here but that’s my general outlook on why charging sucks.

“trying to step around” and running into a player with an established position is the same as trying to block a shot and hitting the shooter’s arm. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Porterhouse said:

Lack of talent. We have some nice guys that fight hard but Shaka had more talent on all of his teams than Beard with this one. We will be back in this position, many times, with Beard. 

I agree completely. I bought into all the hype with the portal guys. And I will say they are all good basketball players but none are elite athletes. This team is one of the least talented Texas teams in 2 decades in my opinion. But damn they play hard and never quit.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, someguy said:

yes.  

Mitchell's dad went on a twitter rampage shortly after Mitchell left and many folks put two and two together and drew conclusions.  But he left for private personal reasons.

Beard chose to keep it quiet.  because that is what he should do.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, OU Sucks said:

Okay, so you still haven't stated why you thought this wasn't a charge?  Marcus established position, and not only did he establish position, he did it way before contact was made.  He didn't slide over at all.  Purdue player bowled straight into him, taking him out.  Again:

 

Somebody needs to explain to me like I’m fuckin 5 yrs old how this is not a charge. Just because the refs are inconsistent about it doesn’t make it any less egregious. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Had Enough said:


Oddly enough many above commented that it was out on Purdue until the consideration of Bishop stepping out of bounds came into play. That after several minutes of review.

The broadcasters and Steratore confirmed what I saw live and on replays: off Bishop’s hand. Then the question of him being out of bounds was raised. Either way it was their ball, 100%. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, A’Dam Psycho said:

Somebody needs to explain to me like I’m fuckin 5 yrs old how this is not a charge. Just because the refs are inconsistent about it doesn’t make it any less egregious. 

agreed.  it's a charge by rule.  whether you like the rule as written is another matter.

lets assume Carr was setting a screen out top and that happened.  would it be called a charge?  yes

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dcar00 said:

agreed.  it's a charge by rule.  whether you like the rule as written is another matter.

lets assume Carr was setting a screen out top and that happened.  would it be called a charge?  yes

So what changed in your view from the first thing you posted about it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Porterhouse said:

The broadcasters and Steratore confirmed what I saw live and on replays: off Bishop’s hand. Then the question of him being out of bounds was raised. Either way it was their ball, 100%. 

Bishop’s foot may or may not have been out, but the ball was definitely touched last by Purdue. 
 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bishop’s foot may or may not have been out, but the ball was definitely touched last by Purdue. 
 

Bishop’s foot was 100% on the floor, out of bounds when he last touched the ball. There were some questionable calls — that was not one of them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...