If they lose, does it matter how the result is achieved?
Are you mentally challenged? "IF" they lose. That's the point. The game was undecided, and the play of both teams should have decided the "if". A mistake DECIDED the game instead of letting the teams decide it, where either team could have won. A mistake decided the outcome, not the players. HOW CAN YOU NOT GRASP THIS?
Are you mentally challenged? "IF" they lose. That's the point. The game was undecided, and the play of both teams should have decided the "if". A mistake DECIDED the game instead of letting the teams decide it in OT, where either team could have won. A mistake decided the outcome, not the players. HOW CAN YOU NOT GRASP THIS?
I understand your POV, the problem is, they're not "****ed" because they have 1.9 seconds to tie the game.
But if you can answer the simple question of where was this outrage when the Spurs were getting jerked around by the refs the past week or so?
I understand your POV, the problem is, they're not "****ed" because they have 1.9 seconds to tie the game.
But if you can answer the simple question of where was this outrage when the Spurs were getting jerked around by the refs the past week or so?
Simple. This game has far more exposure because of the playoff implication it has. But if you can show us video of these 'outrages' then fine, I would be, heh, sufficiently outraged. But I wonder, as you obviously have seen all the outrages you have mentioned, which 'outrage' is the most blatantly obvious to both the audience and in resulting in a Spurs victory/loss.
I understand your POV, the problem is, they're not "****ed" because they have 1.9 seconds to tie the game.
They had 1.9 to jack up a 3 TO TIE. There was no other option, which put the team in an almost impossible situation. They had to hit an amazing shot just to tie the game. That's why it matters.
Quote:
But if you can answer the simple question of where was this outrage when the Spurs were getting jerked around by the refs the past week or so?
Those games would have ended the same anyway, so what does it matter how the inevitable outcome was achieved? /moron
The funny part is, 90% of the people posting in here probably didn't even see the game, but you add Spurs and controversial call and boy do the masses start posting.
They had 1.9 to jack up a 3 TO TIE. There was no other option, which put the team in an almost impossible situation. They had to hit an amazing shot just to tie the game. That's why it matters.
A three with 2 seconds left is impossible? No, a jump shot with .4 is impossible but hey sh!t happens sometimes, huh?
Quote:
Those games would have ended the same anyway, so what does it matter how the inevitable outcome was achieved? /moron
God I can't stand homers.
I hate assclowns with terrible reading comprehension.
The funny part is, 90% of the people posting in here probably didn't even see the game, but you add Spurs and controversial call and boy do the masses start posting.
The funny part is, you are the only person who thinks this made no difference. Wonder why.
The funny part is, 90% of the people posting in here probably didn't even see the game, but you add Spurs and controversial call and boy do the masses start posting.
And how do you know this? Besides, you don't need to watch the game to understand a bull**** call like that. King's got stern'd
Re: Spurs @ King 4/12/09
