11
Feb
08

UT vs. Rutgers, National Champs vs. “Nappy Headed Hos”

post info

By volstothewall
Categories: Tennessee basketball and Uncategorized

bsktwomteam-copy.jpg

Pearl is also expected to be at the game dressed in pink for breast cancer awareness. What’s not to watch?

17 Responses to “UT vs. Rutgers, National Champs vs. “Nappy Headed Hos””

Feed for this Entry Trackback Address
  1. 1 crimson daddy February 11, 2008 at 7:38 pm

    Masterful photoshopping!

    Hilarious, nonetheless.

  2. 2 TideDruid February 11, 2008 at 7:39 pm

    Do they still have any eligibility left?

  3. 3 Ghost of Neyland February 11, 2008 at 8:42 pm

    OH NO!! LOL

    Personally, that was a great game. I think this post is hilarious, by the way.

    Longest. .2. seconds. EVER!

  4. 4 ghostofneyland February 11, 2008 at 8:50 pm

    By the way, I’m sorry, but I never got the “Nappy Headed Hos” fallout. I think it’s very possible for white girls to have nappy hair, and it’s also VERY possible for there to be white hos. I’m not defending Don Imus, but if Howard Stern can get away with all the offensive crap he gets away with, I don’t understand all the buzz surrounding that.

    C. Vivian Stringer is one of the classiest women in basketball, and those girls play hard.

  5. 5 tidefanintn February 11, 2008 at 8:59 pm

    Ha ha. It’s okay, because “it’s also VERY possible for there to be white hos.” See ladies…nothing to be upset about. He was only saying that you have sex for money, probably to fuel your drug addiction. He didn’t mean you might be black. That would be insulting.

  6. 6 ghostofneyland February 11, 2008 at 9:02 pm

    There ARE such things as white ho’s, right?

  7. 7 doubledawgs February 11, 2008 at 9:31 pm

    RUTGERS got robbed!

  8. 8 ghostofneyland February 11, 2008 at 9:52 pm

    Yes. Yes they did.

  9. 9 crimson daddy February 11, 2008 at 10:20 pm

    I missed it. Been watching Troy. For some reason I thought Achilles would’ve been taller.

    And I wouldn’t have watched anyways, because, you know, it’s women’s basketball.

  10. 10 ghostofneyland February 11, 2008 at 10:43 pm

    Caught the last 3 minutes. More than enough of a Women’s Bball Game.

  11. 11 crimson daddy February 11, 2008 at 11:16 pm

    Saw it on Sportscenter. That clock operator as well as the officiating crew should be suspended. That was horrible.

  12. 12 volstothewall February 12, 2008 at 1:12 am

    Yea that was terrible. The clock operator must have stopped the clock at .2. However, that was a dumb foul by the Rutgers player. Why do you grab someone like that at the end of the game? Either way that should have been a Rutgers win, but at least it doesn’t really matter in the grand scheme of things. I mean this is college basketball.

  13. 13 ghostofneyland February 12, 2008 at 11:18 am

    It should have been Rutgers’ win. But I don’t think the clock operator stopped it. He’d have to be the quickest trigger on the block. Basically, when Rutgers inbounded the ball, the .2 STILL didn’t run down. I just think the clock was broken or stuck. I don’t think the operator had anything to do with it. There’s no way it’s physically possible.

    Guys, it’s women’s basketball.

  14. 14 ghostofneyland February 12, 2008 at 12:11 pm

    From espn:

    Debby Jennings, Tennessee’s associate athletic director for media relations, then released a statement from arena manager Tim Reese explaining that Tennessee uses the Precision Timing Device similar to all major conferences.

    Reese said the game clock can only be stopped by the official, who blows his whistle and thus sends a wireless signal to the scorer’s table to automatically stop the clock. Theoretically, that should take the human element out of whole process.

    Someone HAD to blow a whistle, therefore that is why the clock stopped @ .2 seconds. from the replays and the naked eye, it looks bogus but appears to be legit.

  15. 15 Go Vols February 12, 2008 at 2:09 pm

    Check me on this, but I think the officials for the game were from the Big East, not the SEC. Someone is at fault, no doubt, and it’s a bad way for any game to end, but if blame is to be placed, it should be properly placed.

  16. 16 Big Orange Amy February 12, 2008 at 6:33 pm

    “It’s just women’s basketball” is silly, boys. You do realize there are some people who live for Lady Vol basketball (of which I’m related to 4 season ticket holders) the way y’all live for the 3rd Saturday in October (then again, those same 4 season ticket holders love UT football just as much). I’d be remiss if I didn’t stick my two cents in there that just because it’s not YOUR favorite sport doesn’t mean it’s not important to other people. Don’t get me wrong, I myself love football above all, but I still love me some Lady Vol basketball.

    However, I do think that the clock operator was to blame for the “issue” with last night’s game. The Ref purportedly told Coach Stringer that it was “frozen in time” (per a conversation 5 minutes ago with my Dad, who was there and then watched the replay this afternoon). If you ask me, I think the Lady Vols lost last night’s game, but either way, the W ends up in our column. It never should’ve had to come down to .2 seconds - we had a decent lead going into halftime and should’ve performed better throughout the second half.

  17. 17 hooper February 12, 2008 at 8:37 pm

    If the NCAA’s crafty, they’ll make sure that Tennessee and Rutgers are not in the same quarter of the bracket for the tourney. That way, if the two teams do meet, it’ll be somewhere in the Final Four, and the whole issue will be a marketing point. There’s really no need to try to make the match any earlier, as very few people would be convinced to watch the game because of an issue that will be seen as a localized disagreement. However, it could help bump the ratings on a Final Four or Big Dance game just a bit, and would give the announcers something nice and easy to talk about.

    Watching the replay, the problem seems obvious to me. All three officials have their whistles in their mouths during the last UT possession. The reason they do that is to blow the play dead as fast as possible if a foul does occur (a clock-saving maneuver). However, all it probably takes is for one official to breathe through the whistle to cause the clock to trigger. Unfortunately, two of the officials are off-screen when the hitch occurs, so you can’t really see which one might be at fault (btw, the play is on ESPN’s site).

    I don’t know exactly how the rules are written, but I would imagine that if the hitch was the fault of the officials, then it’s going to be considered a part of the game. Since officials in most sports are treated as a part of the field, their interference in a game is treated as a part of the game. If the argument is then made that the clock was stopped by an official before the foul, then UT should have inbounded it with 0.2 seconds left. Most likely the inbound would have involved a lob toward the basket for a Parker tip-in attempt, which would have easily been attempted within the 0.2 second window. The only other possible call was the one the officials made, sending Anosike to the line. Either way, UT would have had one more shot at winning the game. As it turns out, they won on the chance they were given. Fair or not, the officials are a part of the field, and the ruling would have been identical had it happened on the other end of the floor.

    Worse, there’s no real response available to the Lady Vols. They played according to the call that the officials made, even after reviewing the play. The moral right (so to speak) of the play favors the Lady Vols, as odd as it may sound. All teams are instructed to compete, and to let the officials worry about making the right call. It’s their job to trust the ruling, and to abide by it no matter how it plays out.

    It all stinks, but that’s really the way it reads. The whistle-clock system was instituted precisely to remove the clock-keeper from the game, and we see a case where the exact scenario they hoped to avoid was brought about by the system instituted to avoid the scenario. A ref breathes through the whistle, and Anosike gets the two fouls shots.

    Now, if we play with the hypothetical (what would have happened if the clock had run properly), it’s still very hard to tell how the play would have been called. The foul would have occurred either at 0.1 sec, 0.0 sec, or -0.1 sec. The difference would be interpretation: when was the foul initiated? The foul was clearly concluded after the clock would have run out, but the call would have hinged on the initiation of the foul. I’ve looked it over, and it’s really, really tough to place from the ESPN video. I honestly believe that the officials would have declared 0.1 seconds to be on the clock, and the free throws to be awarded. Why? Because the official would have blown his whistle, and I think they would have felt compelled to award the foul and attribute any time lag to the official’s delayed reaction. You can’t tell when the foul contact was made well enough to justify ignoring the whistle, and I do think they’d follow football’s benefit of the doubt model for the replay.

Leave a Reply

« Gottfried: please, leave!
NCAA treats racism like cancer »

Concept


Subscribe!

Calendar

February 2008
S M T W T F S
« Jan   Mar »
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
242526272829  

Your TSIB Roster

Crimson Daddy
Ghost of Neyland
Boomtown Madman
Double Dogs
Gobble Thunder
Vols To The Wall
Capstone King
Vol Walk
TideFanInTN
PowerT

Categories

Count 'em

  • 306,037 intelligent, discriminating souls