Jump to content

Hamshire-Fannett 40 Hardin-Jefferson 39/FINAL


WOSgrad

Recommended Posts

I know the Freshman/JV referee you are talking about and it is disgraceful that an official would call a game his own child is playing in.  It is disgraceful that someone would schedule that (also a HF person).  Referees are by nature supposed to be neutral and he's assigned his own children's games?  Not good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎2‎/‎15‎/‎2020 at 8:35 PM, whsalum said:

Overall I felt the crew did a good job. One of them I consider the best official in the chapter. My bone of contention is an immediate whistle on an intentional foul when a team has fouls to give but more contact completely ignored on the next inbound at the exact same location. If it’s a foul when the opposing team has fouls to give then it’s also a foul when they don’t. 

You talking about the ref that gave the tech?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, The Cook said:

You talking about the ref that gave the tech?

In this quote I don’t remember which official was on the ball. I know there was back to back inbound plays so I’m not sure if the officials rotated or not. My question was calling a touch foul with a foul to give and then not calling one on the exact same contact on the next possession. It’s either a foul on both or neither. Fouls have to be called by violation not situations. Like I said before overall the officials did a good job in the varsity game in a super charged atmosphere. I didn’t agree with the technical but I wasn’t on the floor, I do however know the HF coach was given a warning earlier for a much more demonstrative act. I tip my cap to HF though they did what they needed to do to win. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, whsalum said:

In this quote I don’t remember which official was on the ball. I know there was back to back inbound plays so I’m not sure if the officials rotated or not. My question was calling a touch foul with a foul to give and then not calling one on the exact same contact on the next possession. It’s either a foul on both or neither. Fouls have to be called by violation not situations. Like I said before overall the officials did a good job in the varsity game in a super charged atmosphere. I didn’t agree with the technical but I wasn’t on the floor, I do however know the HF coach was given a warning earlier for a much more demonstrative act. I tip my cap to HF though they did what they needed to do to win. 

I agree with you that the refs did a good job of managing a very intense gym, crowd and teams. I also thought the ref that called the tech looked like he was mad and it was personal

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

    45,935
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    jacobmartin
    Newest Member
    jacobmartin
    Joined



  • Posts

    • This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up
    • Actually I wasn’t responding to your comment. It was funny. I was using your comment to take issue with baddog’s comparison. 😎
    • I mean the baseball kids aren’t even doing football after school, they go to baseball… baseball kids get about a hour during the period. 
    • That is yet to be determined in trial. ”Taking” in the Fifth Amendment doesn’t mean ownership, title changing hands, etc. A government can “take” your property without “taking” your properties.  That has been true.  This issue is, did Texas take the property under the Fifth Amendment and subsequent Supreme Court rulings and not the dictionary definition of “taking”. As always in the law, definitions matter. 
    • Wrong again. This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up   The day that Trump took office, our nation debt stood at 19.9 Trillion dollars (End of Q4, 2016).  After his tax cuts (without corresponding cuts in spending), the national debt stood at 23.2 Trillion dollars at the end of Q1 of 2020 that was the Start of COVID, FYI... Or a total increase in debt of almost 17% during Trump's first three years (and one quarter) in office.  At the end of his reign (with COVID spending for which Trump himself signed off on) was at 27.7 Trillion Dollars.  That's a 39% increase in the National Debt while Trump was in office.  For further reference, Biden inherited a 27.7 Trillion dollar debt to start.  At the end of Q4 2023, the debt stands at 34 Trillion.  That's an increase of 19% over the first three years. I know that math and facts hurt your feelings, but Trump was horrible for the country before he allowed "them Dirty Democrats to shut down the economy."  Anybody that says "Trump was good for the country" doesn't know the first thing about micro/macro economics or the effects of deficit spending.  Trump hurt us like no other president, period.  Anybody that says "Trump was good for the economy" is actually stating for the rest of us with some sense "I don't know what I'm talking about."
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...