Jump to content

WOS @ BC Predictions????


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest bigcat

Just because Bridge City lost a key player and a great athlete for one game does not mean they aren't capable of walking away with a win in five innings or less...  In fact, it gives them a little more incentive to show everyone who's really the "big dog" in this district.

Be careful what you say.Some times the little dog gets the bone.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think BC will take it, who and how many will step up their game at the plate will be interresting but I think it will happen. A definate defense pitching battle here. Very good pitching on both sides usually is a low scoring game that can go either way. Sophie has a lot to work with and it looks like she's putting the pieces together nicely.  ;D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest BreakerCoach

BC has more better players than WOS but #1 Cheater has a way pulling one out of the hat. Good coach in that Cheater that finds a way to win doing whatever it takes. That how he got to be the #1 Cheater. Good luck

Bring your Air Horn Cheater ! ;D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I won't say who they lost nor why yet.  Nothing has been confirmed.  However, one player was ejected for fighting.

Are you saying that there was a fight????  I mean come on, I am not condoning "certain responses" but there was not a fight.  I think the actions by blue were one sided..........should have been both players, or no players.

Now, No matter the reasons this loss I think will hurt BC.  I hope they can pull together and pull it out, WOS will bring their "A" game friday so be prepared.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to these guidelines the player could play Friday.

"Ejection from a UIL contest. If an athlete is ejected or suspended from a contest by an official or coach, it is the Head Coach's responsibility to notify the Executive Director of Athletics as soon as possible as per UIL rules.  The athlete could possibly receive an automatic one game suspension.  A second ejection may lead to possible suspension from the team."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like a little bit of envy here on this softball team.

Are you speaking of BC?

Not as a whole, No.  Just a couple of derogatory comments and nothing to do with players at all.  Kids in general are very supportive of each other and I know for fact that the other key players (two that come to mind) are very supportive.  So no, I'm not speaking of the softball team...maybe one or two adults!?!?!?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will be Hard for BC without there KEY PLAYER!

but She isnt the Whole Team. They Have a lot

of Talent. Hopefully BCs Pitcher Does a Good Job and

Gets the Job Done. Like she has all Year.

and Hopefully the other Girls will do their Best also.

They are going to Fight for this Win. And will not Let Up.

All i have to say is "Good Luck Ladies."

And thats to Both Teams.

My Predictions:

BC gets another WIN!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the way I saw this one, she charged the catcher AFTER the play was completed, and once the out was called. Catcher got up to get the ball because runners were still on the move. The player in question then charged the catcher, thus getting her ejected. Not sure what the catcher did wrong on this? ???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to agree with Joefriday on this one.  The umpire even admitted to the alleged ejected player that the HF catcher did in fact "instigate" the "confrontation".  My vote (not that it matters much), either both players get ejected or both players get warned.  I believe that it wasn't so much that either player wanted to "fight" one another as much as "reaction" in the heat of battle!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Normally the coach will suspend the player for the next game before it goes to the UIL to show that the problem has been taken care of and no futher action is needed. That is where it usually ends. And yes I have seen this happen before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member Statistics

    45,977
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    cfbswami
    Newest Member
    cfbswami
    Joined



  • Posts

    • We'll see. I don't trust us. 
    • Starting pitching has been shaky the last few weeks due to some injuries outside of Hagen Smith.  He goes tomorrow, so y’all should be fine 
    • Manchin may get it but any mention of the radical left that wanted to get rid of the filibuster and end almost 220 years of history because the Democrats are mad?  The House and Senate are obviously different legislative bodies with entirely different election processes and rules for a reason. The House can vote on laws with a simple majority vote. The Senate put rules in place that it would make it much tougher to pass laws. Laws should be difficult to pass. The Senate is often the holdup of the right and left. It takes 60 votes to break the filibuster so any law will almost certainly require agreement at least in part, from opposing sides of an issue. Because they can’t get laws passed, the radical left is like a baby having a tantrum and wants to change over 200 years of history and make it potentially ridiculously easy to pass laws. I have seen current poll maps and it is possible for the Republicans to sweep into complete power in November but by the tiniest margin. That would possibly mean that a single vote margin in both houses could enact what you might call the radical right laws. There would be nothing that the Democrats could do to stop any legislation whatsoever if the left (they are all radical, minus Manchin) got their filibuster rule changed.  That is where the current filibuster comes into play as any new law would require several Democrats to agree with the majority Republicans and vice versa.  Do you want the potential for your radical right to have free rein as the radical left wants by killing the filibuster or is the radical left just as (if not more) dangerous? Let’s see if we have a history in this area? Oh yeah, the Democrats changed the rules in the Senate to allow federal judges to not have to overcome the filibuster. Obama was not getting his federal judge nominations passed and being angry, they changed the rules instead of nominating more moderate justices. They were warned that it would come back to bite them. They didn’t care and chose the nuclear option to change the rules. Oops! Any guess how Trump got all of his Supreme Court nominees passed against strong Democrat opposition? The Democrats got rid of the filibuster for federal judges after another tantrum   So when you are so worried about the radical right, are you equally concerned in what the radical left is always doing by changing rules and history which were put into place just for situations like we are in? So while Manchin gets it, what about his other 50 colleagues (49 + Harris)?  What concerns you more, Abbott and Paxton or the Democrats who want to make it to where if the Republicans do take over, they can go wild… at least in your mind? 
    • MODS please remove that ISD twitter link! I had no idea it would copy the whole posting. I only highlighted the portion about the venue change. Sorry about that!
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...