Jump to content

Beaumont Ozen 50 Beaumont West Brook 47/FINAL


WOSgrad

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, Yeoj said:

Don't forget the refs. Ozen will go undefeated if those 3 call all their games.

You can be serious now the foul count was WB 2- Ozen 16 in the 1st half ,2nd half Ozen 5 &  WB 7. You can’t expect refs to be perfect they are gonna make questionable calls you have to make adjustments and play thru it . Don’t  make excuses it looks bad . WB had a 10 point lead and let it go that’s the real reason .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Yeoj said:

Don't forget the refs. Ozen will go undefeated if those 3 call all their games.

Come on Man lol...Brook was shooting double bonus at the beginning of the 2nd quarter...It's funny the losing team complains about the refs..Sorry the refs didnt bail The Brook out in the end, yall were up by 10 and got out played by a very young Ozen team..WB will get another shot at Ozen Dec.15 at The Brook...Until then we'll keep working to get better... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was at the game, and coach/have coached a few kids from both schools, so my opinion is unbiased. If West Brook can get Parque and Simon going, they should win on their home floor by 15-20. Ozen definitely deserved to win that game though, no doubt. Once they had a few players buy in, it was game over and West Brook folded tent. Even when they were up by a few, their bench looked like they knew they were fixing to lose. Someone other than Boutte has to step up and lead them in that situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, BlkMamba24 said:

You can be serious now the foul count was WB 2- Ozen 16 in the 1st half ,2nd half Ozen 5 &  WB 7. You can’t expect refs to be perfect they are gonna make questionable calls you have to make adjustments and play thru it . Don’t  make excuses it looks bad . WB had a 10 point lead and let it go that’s the real reason .

*ouch*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, BlkMamba24 said:

You can be serious now the foul count was WB 2- Ozen 16 in the 1st half ,2nd half Ozen 5 &  WB 7. You can’t expect refs to be perfect they are gonna make questionable calls you have to make adjustments and play thru it . Don’t  make excuses it looks bad . WB had a 10 point lead and let it go that’s the real reason .

The foul count was 16 to 2 in the first half?  You gotta be kidding me!  I have never heard of a foul count to be that lopsided in a game.  Bottom line is Ozen won the game.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, 409ANALYST said:

The foul count was 16 to 2 in the first half?  You gotta be kidding me!  I have never heard of a foul count to be that lopsided in a game.  Bottom line is Ozen won the game.  

Ozen did have more fouls called on them in the first half but it was not 16-2.  Parquet and CArpenter each had two fouls in the first half.  I'm sure others were called too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, BlkMamba24 said:

You can be serious now the foul count was WB 2- Ozen 16 in the 1st half ,2nd half Ozen 5 &  WB 7. You can’t expect refs to be perfect they are gonna make questionable calls you have to make adjustments and play thru it . Don’t  make excuses it looks bad . WB had a 10 point lead and let it go that’s the real reason .

What looks bad is when at least two of the refs have a serious conflict of interest. And where did you get that foul count from? lol...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You do know after the 10th foul the clock doesn’t keep putting fouls up smdh and i stand corrected it was 13. Nevertheless before you open your mouths make sure you watch the enire game .West Brook isn’t even close to 15-20 points better than Ozen or anyone else. Teams will always be in the game against them because of the tempo and subbing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, BlkMamba24 said:

You do know after the 10th foul the clock doesn’t keep putting fouls up smdh and i stand corrected it was 13. Nevertheless before you open your mouths make sure you watch the enire game .West Brook isn’t even close to 15-20 points better than Ozen or anyone else. Teams will always be in the game against them because of the tempo and subbing. 

Will you be addressing Yeoj's last post?

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.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    45,937
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    jacobmartin
    Newest Member
    jacobmartin
    Joined


  • Posts

    • There is a difference, but I wouldn't at all put it past Trump to do so if he had the infrastructure in place to get away with it like the Dems currently do.  With the amount of effort he's invested in ruining those republicans who've opposed him, it wouldn't surprise me one bit.
    • I think it will be an interesting case and could potentially come up for appeal on a different constitutional point.  The Supreme Court has ruled in the past that the government doesn’t have to take possession of property in order to take it under the meaning of the Fifth Amendment.  If they take away the enjoyment or use of the property, it is no different than physically seizing it to build a highway for example. In a lawsuit as opposed to a criminal trial, a person/plaintiff doesn’t have to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt but rather by a preponderance of evidence or “more likely” to have happened. Maybe it could be described as more likely yes than no or 51%-49%.  ”IF” it can be shown at a trial by a preponderance of evidence that Texas more likely yes than no caused the flooding with its engineering of the project, the people suing might have a case. But…. Does that alone win the case under the Fifth Amendment taking clause? I am not so sure. In US v Causby the Supreme Court ruled that the US government took a man’s property by flying airplanes over it. It was a public airport lawfully leased by the US in WWII and used to fly heavy bombers from it. Causby had an egg farm and the extremely loud noise of some airplanes under full power and sometimes at night with a landing lights being so close, it bothered and scared the family and damaged his egg farm production. Some chickens died and some quit laying eggs due to the extreme disturbances and lights at night. The Supreme Court ruled in Causby’s favor saying that the US had taken away the enjoyment and use of his land even though they didn’t physically seize it. The use of the land was hampered and that was enough for the taking clause under the Fifth Amendment. So in the IH-10 case, did Texas take away the use or enjoyment of the property?  A point of Causby was that the military bombers at a public airport was certainly for “public use”. The planes were public/taxpayers’ and the airport and lease were taxpayers’ property so the “public” definitely used it   My question in this lawsuit against Texas, even in they can prove the damage, was the damage (like in Causby) for “public use”? If not would it then not be a Fifth Amendment case but rather a state law case?  If Texas law denies such a lawsuit under state sovereignty and the families can’t prove a Fifth Amendment case of “public use”, could they prove the damages but still lose the case under state law? I haven’t read that anywhere and just thinking out loud. I could be way off base. But I think it could be interesting…..
    • Both sides...that is, everyone tries to get their people elected. Trump has not weaponized the government to bankrupt and imprison his political opponents. Night and day difference for me.
    • Surely you're aware of the great lengths Trump has gone to disrupt the elections and destroy the careers of republican politicians who haven't supported some of his most outlandish claims, or dared to question him or disagree with him about January 6.  You and I actually agree on this issue, although it must only go one way for you, because Trump's actions against republicans who didn't fall into lockstep with him is one of my biggest concerns about reelecting him.  The fact that he took action to affect literally hundreds of republican primaries from national elections down to municipal levels across the country, is concerning. It would've been one thing had he done it in an effort to help republicans win. Instead his purpose was to push out his perceived detractors and install MAGA politicians at every level of government in as many places as possible, and has resulted in a fractured republican party.
    • Lmao. No doubt. With a name like that, he would've gotten made fun of even if he was home-schooled.
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...