** Official Mizzou Basketball Repository Thread **

[KcMizzou]

I've been wondering why we Mizzou fans don't have one of these.

[mnchiefsguy]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

Funny how KU fans get brought into a conversation after a KSU fan posts a pic of a blatant foul.... I'm sure no Mizzou fans would be complaining about that pic if it was Mizzou looking for the winning bucket Saturday night.

Would I complain? Probably a bit, because it would have been a ticky tack call. I would have been more upset that Mizzou was in that position to begin with, given that they had a ten point lead with 2 and a half minutes to play. Are you saying ku never gets that none call, when they are ahead by one with a few seconds to play? Refs generally don't call the ticky tack fouls at the end of games, that should be common knowledge. To construe this as some giant miscarriage of justice is just stupid and asinine.

[O.city]

How do you get ticky tack there?

Shooters are supposed to be protected when in the act of shooting. He gets his arm pulled away from the ball. If Pressey is bodying him a little there, fine ticky tack. But a hand on the arm?

[mnchiefsguy]

Originally Posted by O.city

How do you get ticky tack there?

Shooters are supposed to be protected when in the act of shooting. He gets his arm pulled away from the ball. If Pressey is bodying him a little there, fine ticky tack. But a hand on the arm?

More like a slap on the arm when you watch it in real time. Regardless, I think if you go back over the entire game and call all of the none calls, I think they would heavily favor Mizzou, by a 2-1 margin. Texas was physical and rough, and the refs decided they did not want to have a free throw contest. It is what it is, Mizzou survives and advances. I do not think anyone should lose any sleep over it.

[stonedstooge]

Missouri was 8-11 from the line and Texas was 16-24. Missouri led throughout the game except going down by 1 in the last minute or so of the game. Hardly think Texas got cheated from the line

[Pasta Little Brioni]

Originally Posted by O.city

How do you get ticky tack there?

Shooters are supposed to be protected when in the act of shooting. He gets his arm pulled away from the ball. If Pressey is bodying him a little there, fine ticky tack. But a hand on the arm?

When refs are allowed to see still pictures of a play come back and chat about this call. Didn't look like much in real time.

[Saul Good]

11 FTs for Mizzou
24 FTs for Texas

Texas wuz robbed

[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by mnchiefsguy

Would I complain? Probably a bit, because it would have been a ticky tack call. I would have been more upset that Mizzou was in that position to begin with, given that they had a ten point lead with 2 and a half minutes to play. Are you saying ku never gets that none call, when they are ahead by one with a few seconds to play? Refs generally don't call the ticky tack fouls at the end of games, that should be common knowledge. To construe this as some giant miscarriage of justice is just stupid and asinine.

No, but I would be objective enough to call it an obvious foul. Of course, you know there's a large area between ticky tack and 'miscarriage of justice' or 'blatant crime against humanity'. It is a foul, there's no ticky tack about it. There was no tackling involved, and it's obviously not the worst non-call ever.

If it was KU, I might throw a troll face out there or say something like 'damn, we got away with one there'... not sure why fans feel like they have to defend it by saying it's ticky tack or whatever.

FWIW, I hate when refs change the rules at the end of the game... that call should have been made in the first minute of the game or the last 5 seconds.

[mnchiefsguy]

Originally Posted by Bearcat

No, but I would be objective enough to call it an obvious foul. Of course, you know there's a large area between ticky tack and 'miscarriage of justice' or 'blatant crime against humanity'. It is a foul, there's no ticky tack about it. There was no tackling involved, and it's obviously not the worst non-call ever.

If it was KU, I might throw a troll face out there or say something like 'damn, we got away with one there'... not sure why fans feel like they have to defend it by saying it's ticky tack or whatever.

FWIW, I hate when refs change the rules at the end of the game... that call should have been made in the first minute of the game or the last 5 seconds.

If the bolded bart had occurred, this situation never happens, as Mizzou would have at least ten more points from the line. Mizzou got less than half of the free throw attempts of Texas. I fail to see how anyone could look at how Texas played and conclude that the Tigers fouled more than twice as often as the Longhorns.

Jayhawk fans should really not ever complain about the refs. Elite teams in college basketball get the benefit of the regs 90% of the time...that is just the way it is when you have humans making judgement calls. Reputation matters, and no ref wants to hear the guys on sportcenter talking about how the refs decided the outcome of a game.

[mnchiefsguy]

Originally Posted by PGM

When refs are allowed to see still pictures of a play come back and chat about this call. Didn't look like much in real time.

This really sums it up here. Bobby Knight did not seem to think it was a blatant foul or anything. In real time, there is a slap and some contact. In real time, it is a ticky tack foul. Slow motion can make this look much more significant than they actually are.

[beer bacon]

Originally Posted by mnchiefsguy

More like a slap on the arm when you watch it in real time. Regardless, I think if you go back over the entire game and call all of the none calls, I think they would heavily favor Mizzou, by a 2-1 margin. Texas was physical and rough, and the refs decided they did not want to have a free throw contest. It is what it is, Mizzou survives and advances. I do not think anyone should lose any sleep over it.

Really? MU was driving to the basket all game and shot 13 less three throws.

[mnchiefsguy]

Originally Posted by beer bacon

Really? MU was driving to the basket all game and shot 13 less three throws.

That was what I was trying to say...Mizzou should have had at least the same number of free throws as Texas, if not more. I probably did not phrase it right.

[KevB]

Originally Posted by mnchiefsguy

This really sums it up here. Bobby Knight did not seem to think it was a blatant foul or anything. In real time, there is a slap and some contact. In real time, it is a ticky tack foul. Slow motion can make this look much more significant than they actually are.

I saw it real time and called it as a foul at the time in this thread. Dude shot a 5 foot floater like a bullet and hit the underside of the rim. It obviously affected the shot. I was surprised it wasn't called, simply because a ref typically sees that kind of foul (near the ball in the shooter's hand), but doesn't see body contact. I'm indifferent, just surprised it wasn't called at the time that I saw it.

[Saul Good]

If the refs had called every foul on Mizzou but only called the same amount of fouls on Texas, the Longhorns would have had a better chance to win. There you go.

24-11 disparity in free throws wasn't enough. Its an outrage. I demand 35-11 next time we go to Texas. Plus, the ref should kick the ball during a breakaway and call it out of bounds on Mizzou even though it didn't come within a foot of the sideline twice next time instead of just once.

[Saul Good]

If the refs had called every foul on Mizzou but only called the same amount of fouls on Texas, the Longhorns would have had a better chance to win. There you go.

24-11 disparity in free throws wasn't enough. Its an outrage. I demand 35-11 next time we go to Texas. Plus, the ref should kick the ball during a breakaway and call it out of bounds on Mizzou even though it didn't come within a foot of the sideline twice next time instead of just once.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by KevB

I saw it real time and called it as a foul at the time in this thread. Dude shot a 5 foot floater like a bullet and hit the underside of the rim. It obviously affected the shot. I was surprised it wasn't called, simply because a ref typically sees that kind of foul (near the ball in the shooter's hand), but doesn't see body contact. I'm indifferent, just surprised it wasn't called at the time that I saw it.

The other thing that I heard someone say about it this morning was that you have a better chance of getting that call if your offensive effort prior to the shot looks crisp and purposeful than if you're scrambling around helter skelter looking like you don't know what you're doing. The theory was that it sets the psychological baseline on which the ref is operating when it comes time to either make the call or not make the call. It sounded like a reasonable theory to me.