Beat The Bears!!!

[Newsbreaker]

I think the pic was clean, ie he got the ball cleanly, but then clearly used his arm to disadvantage the ball handler in recovering.

[jman2004]

Sorry, but NO WAY! If anything, Ahearn fouled him going after the loose ball!

If you admit that the pic was clean, then that means it's a loose ball. Ahearn and Brooks were both grabbing and pushing each other. That play would've tied the game.

[Newsbreaker]

Sorry, but NO WAY! If anything, Ahearn fouled him going after the loose ball!

If you admit that the pic was clean, then that means it's a loose ball. Ahearn and Brooks were both grabbing and pushing each other. That play would've tied the game.

That's not the way it looked on the replay to me.

I don't think I'd have made that call, in that situation, but I don't think it was a wrong call either.

[merkpanthers]

This is the problem with officiating. Coleman gets mobbed under the hoop by two guys and one gets the steal and nothing is called, but yet on the same possession Brooks gets a clean pic (live and replay and everything else in the books) and gets a foul called on him. At least the refs could be consistant, but I guess that's impossible. It's a whole new game if nothing is called. All knotted up with a minute to go and the crowd screamming....I bet we win. It just sucks that the refs had to blow this one.

[Newsbreaker]

merk, understand you are only stating your opinion, no matter what book you're talking about.

[jman2004]

News, I know you don't disagree with the foul call, but could you at least agree that if the ref would've swallowed his whistle like he should have, that play would have DEFINATELY changed the outcome of this game?

I'm not saying it cost us the game as it only would've tied it. But it would've kept our momentum.

[Newsbreaker]

DEFINITELY? No. There's too much we can't know there.

Had an impact? Obviously.

[jman2004]

I guess I meant that it could've changed the outcome either way. MSU could've come back and silenced us, or we could've eventually gone ahead.

[Purple Reign]

Newsy's like my Dad

Newsy-----A few centuries ago, when I was a kid in my teens, I used to get into some very heated arguments with my late father. They could have been about anything, politics, school, sports, you name it. It wasn't until he was in the twilight of his years that he told me that he usually agreed with me in those "debates" and the position I had taken. But, he wanted to teach me to defend my position and stand my ground if I thought I was really "right." At times, on this board you remind me of those days. Thanks, "dad."

P.S.------you're wrong and I'm right !!!!!!

PR

[Newsbreaker]

I'm pretty sure that was something of a compliment PR, and I'm going to take it as such. Thanks, sincerely!

If I feel I have a defensible position, I will do everything I can to defend it. I like to think I can admit when I'm wrong as well, however. I'm certainly not afraid to stand alone.

[panther2317]

You've already admitted that the pick was clean...so you are completely right there. You're also correct in saying that officials don't win or lose games. What I'd like to see you come to terms with is that the officials can take away the opportunity for the players to determine the outcome on the floor. That's what happened Saturday night. The bald beauty took away the chance to make a play. And it wasn't even his call to make. That's why it's so frustrating to me.

[Newsbreaker]

"Take away" implies intent. I'm strongly against implication of intent.

[panther2317]

It implies intenet to you because you love arguing and want to "win" this conversation. I didn't mean it with "intent". I don't think he did it on purpose. He just blew his whistle when he shouldn't have. Is that why you don't agree...do you think that I (and others) think he made the call because he wanted UNI to lose? That's sophomoric. I hope no one believes that. I think he sucks at his job...but I don't think he sucks on purpose. He sucks unintentionally.

[Newsbreaker]

I'm not trying to "win" anything, I'm only pointing out how your words can be percieved.

If he sucks unintentionally, and is just bad at his job, then he must be making mistakes all the time, right? And if there is no intent on his part, then those mistakes must be benefiting and penalizing both teams at various points, therefore creating a "wash." In that case, both teams are playing with identical baskets, on the same court, with the same officials doing the same job...hence, the game is left to the players.

These complaints are like an NBA team complaining about that synthetic ball they were using...the ball sucked, and the poor grip on it might've meant you lost an offensive opportunity late, when you most needed to succeed. Would that have made crying about the ball at this lengnth wise, or fruitful?

We've spent pages discussing this one call. How about the manner in which our team played? It's all an argument in an effort to ignore the real problems, and from an outside perspective it will make us look petty, silly, uninformed, and like poor sports.

Like I said before, we heard all sorts of laughing and finger pointing at Iowa fans for crying about that Outback Bowl call, but I guess it's okay when it's us.

I'm just asking for consistency.

[panther2317]

I am being consistent. You keep adding more and more tangents to the discussion. Everytime a person comes up with a very logical point, you bring up another point and then another. If what you are saying is true...then the same amount of fouls would be called in every game and both teams would get the same amount of free throw attempts...right?

There's no way officiating can be a "wash" because the people blowing the whistle are human...there's no way to predict when they'll make a mistake. It can happen at anytime. It can happen that they make more mistakes towards one team. It's still just a mistake...but it can have a profound effect on the outcome of the game.

Also, if you weren't trying to "win" this conversation, then why do you keep trying to prove me wrong? I'll flat out admit I'm trying to convince you that an official can take away the opportunity to win a game from a team. If that's not true, why do we have instant replay in football? Why can they go to the monitor to check calls in basketball?

Finally, I agree our guys need to play better. I posted in another thread that the Panthers could have done 100 things to win the game way before this call occurred (make more shots comes to mind), but that doesn't take away from this point in the game...an official made a call that took an opportunity away from UNI's players to tie the game. Would Brooks have tied the game? I don't know...and now we'll never know.