Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Uh, How is it we had few fouls called in the first half and in most of our games on the road this year?Originally posted by iubaseball:
Now Wisky knows how Big Ten teams feel when they play Wisky. Wisky never gets in foul trouble when they play at home , in fact I am not sure if any visiting Big Ten team ever gets to shoot the bonus at Kohl center. Bo always screams out to the press, refs and Big Ten that we do not foul and Wisky get every call in the world from Big Ten refs wherever they play in the Big Ten. And Bo calls refs anything he wants to and not even reprimanded by the Big.
So now Wisky loses and of course Wisky fans fans cry foul. Hell, they only called two fouls on you in the first half and should have called at least six more. You did not cry about that. You lost, end of story.
Wisky, still only Big Ten school with no baseball team because you are afraid of Title 9. We will not even know Wisky exists until next year now. But you did have a great year. Be happy for that
Yes, the truth isn't something worth discussing anymore in this once great country, just accept and move on.Originally posted by bshrader1:
THIS TIMES 1,000!!!
You just got outplayed by a better team with players who made bigger plays down the stretch, end of story.
I heard not one mention of foul discrepancy in the first half when the foul count was what, 10-2??!
Not to mention Frank bear hugs Okafor as he's putting in a lay-up...you're telling me thats basketball-related play? LOL Should have easily been an intentional foul.
Do yourselves a favor, don't take after Bo's example. It isn't a good look. For anyone.
True but Duke beat UW twice.Originally posted by G_a_r_y:
Notre Dame beat Duke twice.
Really?Originally posted by Crank_it_loud:
and only called 2 fouls on the Badgers in the first half (nearly a statistical impossibility).
Originally posted by bshrader1:
This logic is just ridiculously flawed, its hard to attempt to combat it.
Believe what you will. The argument isn't a red herring because its relevant to the issue.
While you as a UW fan see this as just another foul, the rest of the world sees it for what it is, an intentional foul that wasnt called. Do I understand your argument? Yes. Does it make it more plausible? No. It should be an intentional foul because there was on effort by Kaminsky to make a play on the ball. Just because it ISNT called doesnt mean it SHOULDNT be. Don't confuse the two.
Winslow stepping on the endline should have been whistled, but its a hustle play, much like Kaminsky's foul, so it shouldnt be called right??
Just using your logic here.
I told you conversation over, you win.